IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1017 of 2007 SHANKAR PRASAD SINGH, S/O SRI RAMDULAR SINGH, R/O VILLAGE-DANDPUR, P.S. AND DISTRICT- JEHANABAD. ……………PETITIONER. Versus 1. UNION OF INDIA. 2. JILE SINGH SAGAR, SON OF NAME NOT KNOWN, THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL, CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE, HEC, DHUZWA, P.S.-JAGANNATHPUR RANCHI, JHARKHAND. ……………OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- 3 20.05.2009 Learned senior counsel for the petitioner points out that there is only technical compliance of the orders of this Court by the opposite parties. He submits that no effective opportunity was given to the petitioner to present his case as his lawyer who was present before the appellate authority was denied appearance for the petitioner. A show cause has been filed in the case in which it is stated that in compliance of the orders of this Court opportunity was given to the petitioner and fresh orders have been passed. The points raised by learned senior counsel for the petitioner may be one of procedural irregularity committed by the appellate authority in passing the order afresh in terms of the directions of this Court, but that can not be a ground for proceeding against the opposite parties for contempt. The petitioner, if advised, may challenge the said order in an appropriate proceeding raising all grounds which may be available to him. With above observations, this contempt application is disposed of. Arvind/ (J. N. Singh, J.)