IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10815 of 2004 1. Satya Narayan Thakur son of late Khobai Thakur, resident of village Kachor, P.S. Kanhauli, Dist. Sitamarhi ( aged 49 years). 2. Ram Swarath Sah son of late Harihar Sah, resident of village Kishanpur, P.S. Bathnaha, Dist. Sitamarhi. 3. Jay Prakash Prasad, son of late Ram Baran Sah, resident of village Kamaldah, P.S. Bathnaha, Dist. Sitamarhi 4. Shri Kishun Prasad son of late Kodai Ram choudhary, resident of village Asogi, P.S. Bargainia, Dist. Sitamarhi. 5. Prahlad Safi, son of late Raudi Safi, resident of village Riga, P.S. Riga, Dist. Sitamarhi. 6. Ram Narayan Mahto son of Jugeshwar Mahto, resident of village Bhuthi, P.S. Sonbarsa, Dist. Sitamarhi. 7. Yogendra Rai son of late Dubri Rai resident of village Kharika, P.S. Sitamarhi Sadar, Dist. Sitamarhi. 8. Kaushlesh Kumar son of late Aditya Narayan Prasad, resident of village Ganeshpur, P.S. Riga, Dist. Sitamarhi. 9. Ganaur Sah, son of Sukhalu Sah, resident of village Mohani Mandal, P.S. Majorganj, Dist. Sitamarhi. ---Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Secretary, Department of Co-operation, New Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Registrar, Co-operative Societies, New Secretariat, Patna. 4. The Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 5. District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari. 6. The Managing Director, Sitamarhi District Central Co-operative Bank Limited at Dumra, Dist. Sitamarhi. ---Respondents. ---------------------------------- 08. 15.10.2011 Heard Mr. Jai Prakash Singh learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Niti Ranjan Jha, learned counsel for the respondent- Bank and Mr. Ajay Kumar Sharma, learned Assistant Counsel to A.A.G.-1 for the State. Petitioners pray for quashing of the communication dated 03.11.2003 (Annexure-2), issued by the Secretary, Co-operative Department, Government of Bihar. On perusal of the said communication, it appears that concerned Divisional Commissioners were informed to take appropriate action in the light of order passed 2 by the Hon’ble Apex Court and the contempt application arising therefrom. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the application has lost its significance since from the materials available on record it appears that Hon’ble Apex Court has finally disposed of the matter. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly states that he has not received any instruction from his clients in recent past. Having heard the parties and on perusal of the materials on record, in my view, the application now requires to be consigned. I, order accordingly. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)