IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2648 of 2007 RAMESH CHANDRA SINGH & ANR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4. 7.10.2009 The petitioners have come to this Court claiming violation of the order dated 3.8.2006 passed in C.W.J.C. No.13963 of 2003. It is the stand of the petitioners that the said writ application, in which these petitioners were not the petitioners, was allowed on the basis of a similar order passed by this Court in the case of two of the five affected persons, which case was allowed by this Court and the order was upheld in L.P.A. and S.L.P. By the said order dated 14.3.2000 the order dated 2.1.1999, which related to as many as five employees including the petitioner of C.W.J.C. No.13963 of 2003 and these two petitioners, was directed to be kept in abeyance. Similar benefit was granted to the writ petitioner of C.W.J.C. No.13963 of 2003 by the order dated 3.8.2006. Learned counsel for these two petitioners submits that since their cases stand on exactly similar footing, hence, not granting the same benefit by the opposite parties amounts to a violation of the order dated 3.8.2006. - 2 - In the show cause filed on behalf of opposite party No.3, the Director, Secondary Education, Bihar, the stand taken is that so far as these two petitioners are concerned, they had earlier moved this Court by filing C.W.J.C.No.5946 of 1997, which was disposed of on 17.12.1997, in which the direction was given to pass an order for payment of current salary. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on the said date the writ application itself was not disposed of, though the said direction was issued. It is accepted by both the parties that on the basis of the said direction of this Court, the Director, Secondary Education has passed a subsequent order dated 23.3.1999, by which the appointments of the petitioners were declared illegal and they were directed to be terminated. Against the said order dated 23.3.1999, the petitioners have filed another writ petition and both the matters have been tagged together and are pending. For the said reasons, it is submitted by learned counsel for the State that the case of the petitioners is still pending before this Court and thus they cannot claim that any contempt has been - 3 - committed by the opposite parties on the basis of the order dated 3.8.2006 passed by this Court in C.W.J.C. No.13963 of 2003 with respect to another petitioner. On a consideration of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that it may not be appropriate to proceed under the contempt jurisdiction of this Court in the present matter, as the cases of these petitioners have proceeded in a slightly different manner and as the challenge to the order passed by the Director, Secondary Education, subsequent to memo dated 2.1.1999 is still under consideration of this Court. The contempt application is, accordingly, dismissed. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J. )