IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.3286 of 2009 LAL BIHARI THAKUR S/O LATE RAMJI THAKUR R/O VILL.- GOSAI TOL, P.S.- RAJNAGAR, DISTT.- MADHUBANI ---PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR REPRESENTED THROUGH SHRI ASHOK SINGH, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,INDIRA BHAWAN, RAM CHARITER PATH, BAILY ROAD, PATNA REPRESENTED THROUGH OPPOSITE PARTY NO.3. 3. ANSULI ARYA, THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, INDIRA BHAWAN, RAM CHARITER PATH, BAILY ROAD, PATNA. ---Opp. Parties ----------- 5. 12.4.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and opposite parties no.2 and 3 as also the State. A show cause has been filed on behalf of opposite parties no.2 and 3 stating therein to the effect that the order of the Court has been complied with by passing the order, as contained in Annexure A to the show cause, and as such the contempt application need not proceed further. It is further submitted that the order, as contained in Annexure A, is a reasoned order indicating the consideration of the representation of the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the policy decision, which appears to have been taken by the opposite party-Corporation as reflected in its order, is not justified since only 20% of the entire income of the Corporation has been earmarked for payment of the gratuity and as such in that process it may take a long time and in the circumstances, the petitioner submits that the said policy decision is not correct and also not beneficial in the interest of the employee concerned. 2 Be that as it may, since the order of this Court has been complied with, the contempt application need not proceed further. However, it will be open for the petitioner to assail the aforesaid order, as contained in Annexure A, if so advised, in accordance with law. The contempt application stands disposed of. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)