IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.3108 of 2008 4 11.9.2009 Bihar Central Co-operative Bank Employees Federation District Unit, Begusarai Central Co-operative Bank through its Secretary Chandra Bhushan Singh, son of Late Ram Balak Singh, resident of village- Hadipur, Police Station- Bachhwra, District Begusarai ..... Petitioner VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Co-operative Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Bihar Patna 2. Mr Ravi Kumar, Secretary, Co-operative Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Bihar Patna 3. Shri Narsingh Upadhaya, Registrar, Co-operative Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Bihar Patna 4. Shri Ramayan Choudhary, Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna 5. Mr Ajay Kumar Alankar, Managing Director, Begusarai Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Begusarai at Mungeriganj, Begusarai 6. Mr Kamal Kishore Singh, Chairman, Begusarai Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Begusarai ..... Opposite Parties. ------- For the Petitioner : Mr Amrendra Kumar Sinha No.1, Adv. For the State : Mr Manoj Kumar Sinha, AC to GP 1 For Resp. No.5 : Mr Sanjay Kumar, Advocate -------- Heard the parties. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent no.5, the Managing Director, Begusarai Central Co-operative 2 Bank Limited, submits that already the retirement age of employees of the bank has been raised from 58 to 60 years. He as well as learned counsel for the State has taken an objection that the petitioner is an employees federation of Begusarai Central Co-operative Bank and no relief has been granted to the federation through any order passed by this Court and hence, this contempt petition should not be entertained at the instance of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a judgment dated 6.8.2007 passed by a single Judge of this Court in the case of Shyam Kishore Sinha v. the State of Bihar, 2007 (3) PLJR 830, to submit that similar facility should have been given to other employees of the Bank but that is not being done. In the facts of the case, we do not feel persuaded to initiate a contempt proceeding at the instance of the petitioner when no relief has been ever granted to the petitioner by this Court in any proceeding. The affected individual employees or the federation should first get their rights settled and only if the judgment in their favour is deliberately ignored or disregarded by the respondent 3 bank, they may approach this Court for contempt. This application is disposed of. (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Jyoti Saran, J.) sk