IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2732 of 2006 RAJDEO SINGH & ANR Versus DR.MADAN MOHAN JHA & ORS ----------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajeev Kr. Singh, Adv. For the Opposite parties : Mr.Alok Kr., J.C. to G.A.I ------------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ---------- Dated, the 17th July, 2008. On 3.7.2006, in the writ petition filed by the petitioners, the following order came to be passed: - “Accordingly, the petitioners may pursue the matter departmentally for redressal of their grievances which would be considered and disposed of by the authorities concerned in accordance with law expeditiously and not beyond a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.” 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the aforesaid order has not been complied with, deliberately and intentionally. 3. A cause has been shown by the opposite party no.4 by filing written response. It has been stated thus in the show-cause: - “3. That in the present context it is most humbly submitted that the order passed by the Hon’ble Court stands duly complied as the representation filed by the petitioners had duly been considered and as the - 2 - petitioners were not found eligible for promotion in B.Sc. trained scale hence the representation filed by the petitioners was rejected vide memo no.9445 dated 7.12.2006 copies of which have also been issued to the petitioners. 4. That the petitioner had primarily put forward their claim for promotion in B.Sc. trained scale on the ground that juniors to them i.e. respondent no. 5 to 8 have already been granted promotion in B.Sc. trained scale. But upon consideration it had been found that the teachers to whom the petitioners have referred as Juniors, had obtained the qualification of B.Sc. prior to the petitioners. The petitioners had passed training examination on 27.1.1984 and B.Sc. examination in the year 1989 whereas respondent nos. 5 to 8 possessed the qualification of B.Sc. trained prior to 1989. Further it is stated that in the computerized gradation list prepared in terms of promotion Rule (Bihar Taken Over Elementary School Teachers Promotion Rule, 1993). The respondent no.5 ranks at serial no.48, Respondent no.6 at serial no.59, respondent no.7 at serial no.60 and respondent no.8 at serial no.66 whereas petitioner no.1 ranks at serial no.146 and petitioner no.2 at serial no.147. Thus in no way the respondents are junior to the petitioners. 5. That in view of the aforesaid factual position the claim of the petitioners had been rejected vide memo no.9445 dated 7.12.2006.” 4. We are satisfied that the order dated 3.7.2006 has been complied with and nothing further needs to be done in this contempt application. 5. M.J.C. stands disposed of accordingly. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J Pawan/-