IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1001 of 2011 Umesh Kumar Suman Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors. ---------------------------------- 4 . 24.08.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. Opposite party nos. 4 & 7 are present in person. A show cause is filed on behalf of Opposite party no. 4 enclosing as Annexure ‘F’ fresh order passed terminating the services of Respondent no. 12 in the writ petition. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the opposite parties were then required to consider the petitioner for appointment in view of his next position in the merit panel as this Court had given liberty to the District Magistrate to pass fresh orders thereafter. The vacancy was singular. No sooner that Respondent no. 12 in the writ petition came to be appointed the vacancy was exhausted. If subsequently Respondent no. 12 was removed from service for any reason it does not revive the exhausted vacancy but creates a fresh vacancy and therefore insofar as the contempt jurisdiction is concerned the Court finds no infirmity in the order of the District Magistrate directing fresh selection. The MJC application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)