IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17819 of 2009 1. RAJESH KUMAR S/O LATE KISHORE KUMAR VERMA R/O VILLAGE + P.O.- RAIPUR, P.S.- NANPUR, DISTT.- SITAMARHI 2. SHAMBHU KUMAR S/O LATE RAM CHANDRA PRASAD R/O MOHALLA- RACE COURSE, CHAKKAR MAIDAN, MUZAFFARPUR 3. MOHAN PASWAN S/O MUNNI LAL PASWAN R/O MOHALLA- GOBARSAHI, P.S.- SADAR, MUZAFFARPUR, DISTT.- MUZAFFARPUR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. CHIEF ENGINEER ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, NORTH BIHAR, MUZAFFARPUR 5. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, NORTH BIHAR CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR 6. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DIVISION NO.-2, MUZAFFARPUR 7. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ROAD DIVISION, SITAMARHI 8. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ROAD DIVISION MOTIHARI, EAST CHAMPARAN 9. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ROAD CONSTRUCTION DIVISION NO.1 ----------- 2. 5.3.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners came to this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 403 of 2006, aggrieved by the order dated 12.12.2005 by which their pay scale was reduced from that of Accounts Clerk and order for recovery was passed. The writ petition was allowed on 1.2.2006. Consequently, the respondents complied the order of the Court on 24.6.2006 by giving him the correct pay scale. The petitioners are now aggrieved by the 2 orders dated 29.2.2008 and 11.3.2008 by which the order dated 24.6.2006 passed in compliance of the order of the writ Court has been directed to be kept in abeyance because the State is stated to have preferred a Review application no. 201 of 2007 in C.W.J.C. No. 403 of 2006. Learned counsel for the State very fairly conceeds that the mere filing of a Review application does not tantamount to stay of the order of the writ Court. The compliance of the order of the Court by the respondents themselves assumes great importance in this background. Surely, the State cannot arrogate to itself powers which the Constitution vests in the Courts. The matter is remanded to the respondent no. 3 to pass a reasoned and speaking order within a maximum period of two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order in light of the aforesaid discussion, if the State has the authority to overreach the orders in C.W.J.C. No. 403 of 2006. This shall be without prejudice to the rights of the State in Civil Review No. 201 of 2007. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.) 3