IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2079 of 2010 PINKI KUMARI . Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. . ----------- 2/ 16/03/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the opposite parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notwithstanding the orders of the S.D.O. directing appointment of the petitioner, the Sarpanch was not complying with the same. The order on the writ petition was to file an application before the S.D.O. who was required to examine matters, hear the parties and pass a reasoned and speaking order. If that part of the direction has been complied with, there if no occasion to proceed any further in the contempt jurisdiction as there was no Mandamus issued thereafter with regard to an appointment. If the petitioner is aggrieved by failure of the opposite parties to comply with the order of the S.D.O., his remedy lies in a fresh proceeding before the appropriate authority/forum. The contempt proceedings stand disposed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)