IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.203 of 2010 Arbind Kumar Singh Versus State Of Bihar & Ors. ---------------------------------- 03. 18.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. This contempt application has been filed complaining the disobedience of the order dated 26.07.2005 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 4597 of 2004, as contained in Annexure- 1, whereby this court quashed the punishment of dismissal of the petitioner from the service having found that the disciplinary authority upon differing with the findings recorded in the enquiry report did not issue any notice to the petitioner indicating the reasons for such difference. Accordingly, the order of punishment was quashed. It is submitted that after passing of such order, petitioner was reinstated in service, however, soon thereafter, a second show cause notice was issued to the petitioner. The same was replied as per his letter dated 22nd September 2005, as contained in Annexure - 4. Besides, replying to the second show cause notice on merit it was also requested that the second show cause notice be withdrawn. However, the disciplinary authority proceeded and final order of punishment was passed against the petitioner as per memo no. 2561 dated 10th 2 of May 2007, as contained in Annexure- 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a fresh order of punishment was passed and as such, concerned opposite party committed the contempt by disobeying the order of this court passed on 26th of July 2005 and as such, this contempt application has been filed on 21st of January 2010. Petitioner did not file any appeal against the aforesaid order of punishment as contained in Annexure- 6. As regards the filing of the contempt application after long delay, the only explanation as given in paragraph – 16 of the contempt application is that since petitioner’s daughter was suffering from disease, as such, this contempt application filed after delay. Considering the submission of the petitioner and the State, it is not in dispute that after passing of the order, as contained in Annexure- 1, petitioner was reinstated in service, thereafter, disciplinary proceeding proceeded by issuing second show cause notice which was replied by the petitioner. Petitioner, thereafter, awaiting for final order and when after the final order is passed against him the petitioner filed this contempt application stating therein that the authorities ought not to have proceeded against the petitioner. I do not find any force in the aforesaid submissions. If petitioner had any grievance against 3 the aforesaid show cause notice to which the petitioner has replied, petitioner could have agitated and put his grievance at that time which the petitioner is now contending in the year 2010. Moreover, the above order, as contained in Annexure – 6 having not appealed the same has attend its finality. The submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner that no one can go behind the court’s order is not in dispute. The authorities have not gone behind the order rather have complied the order by reinstating the petitioner in service, thereafter, proceeded in the matter and as such, I do not find it a fit case for proceeding further in matter. Accordingly, the contempt application stands dismissed. Jagdish ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)