IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.3403 of 2008 1. KULA NAND JHA SON OF LATE KHADANAND JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NAVHATH, P.O. RAMPATTI, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI 2. CHANDRA KANT JHA, SON OF LATE RADHA KANT JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KATHRA, P.O. KATHRA, P.S. MANIGACHHI,DISTT.- DARBHANGA………. PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,PATNA 2. SRI ANJANI KUMAR SINGH, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, (HIGHER EDUCATION), HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. KAMESHWAR SINGH DARBHANGA SANSKRIT UNIVERSITY, THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR,DR. DEVENDRA PD.SINGH. 4. SRI NAND KISHORE SHARMA, VICE CHANCELLOR, KAMESHWAR SINGH DARBHANGA SANSKRIT UNIVERSITY,KAMESHWAR NAGAR,DARBHANGA 5. DR. DEVENDRA PD. SINGH, REGISTRAR, KAMESHWAR SINGH DARBHANGA SANSKRIT UNIVERSITY- KAMESHWAR NAGAR,DARBHANGA,DISTT. DARBHANGA…….OPP. PARTIES ----------- 6 5-1-2011 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to correct the name of the Hon’ble the Chief Justice in supplementary show cause filed on behalf of respondent no.2. Heard the parties. From annexure-A to the supplementary show cause filed on behalf of opposite party no.2 it has been shown by learned counsel for the State that opinion of the State Government has been communicated by the Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna to the office of Hon’ble Chancellor through its letter dated 15th January, 2010. He has submitted that in that view 2 of the matter a final decision has already been communicated to the Chancellor and hence the order of the writ court, so far as it relates to the State Government has been complied with. Learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the communication contained in annexure-A is not a decision by the State Cabinet nor it is expressed in the prescribed manner. The decision should have been expressed in a formal manner showing that it was by the State Cabinet. The aforesaid submission may be relevant for challenging the decision of the State Government if such an occasion arises. So far as contempt proceeding is concerned, the Secretary of the Department has expressed his satisfaction that it is the opinion of the State Government and accordingly he has communicated to the Chancellor. The contempt proceeding is, therefore, dropped. It goes without saying that if the petitioners are aggrieved by the decision of the State Government in the concerned matter, they would be at liberty to take recourse to law through appropriate proceeding in accordance with law. Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)