IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.3838 of 2010 MANO RANJAN PRASAD . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SRI . S.K. NAGI & ANR. ----------- 2. 06.04.2011 Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly acknowledges from Annexure-A, to the show cause that his case has been considered and orders passed for grant of promotion accordingly. He however submits that contrary to the recitals contained in the very same order dated 3.11.2010, a direction for payment of consequential benefits by the Court noticed in the aforesaid order still remains elusive. Compliance of the order of a Court means complete compliance and not a truncated compliance. A truncated compliance amounts to contempt. The Court could have proceeded in contempt jurisdiction against the opposite parties. It however refrains from doing so with the following observations. If the consequential benefits in terms of the order dated 3.11.2010 are not paid to the petitioner within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before the opposite party no. 2, not only shall the petitioner be entitled to file another writ application with a claim for interest but the interest that may be so awarded by the competent Court shall be recovered personally from the 2 salary of the opposite party no. 2, quite apart from the issue administrative indiscipline for non compliance of the order despite the indulgence granted in the contempt jurisdiction. The application stands disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)