IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.860 of 2009 1. RAJENDRA KUMAR MANDAL, PUMP OPERATOR, GRADE III EMPLOYEE, SUNDERVATI MAHILA MAHAVIDYALAYA, BHAGALPUR. 2. BRAHMDEO THAKUR, PEON IVTH GRADE EMPLOYEE, SUNDERVATI MAHILA MAHAVIDYALA, BHAGALPUR 3. JAHANGIR MANDAL, PEON, IVTH GRADE EMPLOYE3E, SUNDERVATI MAHILA MAHAVIDYALAYA, BHAGALPUR. VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SRI K.K.PATHAK, SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION BIHAR 3. DR PREMA JHA, VC, TM UNIVERSITY, BHAGALPUR 4. V.K.SINGH, REGISTRAR, T.M. UNIVERSITY 5. R.C.CHAUDHARY., DR, T.M.UNIVERSITY 6. R.D.SINGH, PRINCIPAL, S.M. MAHAVIDALAYA, BHAGALPUR. ----------- 3 05.10.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Keshri, learned counsel appearing for the University. Petitioners have come to this Court for initiation of contempt proceeding against opposite party no. 3 to 5 for flouting order dated 13.1.2006, passed in C.W.J.C.No. 3377 of 2000 which had been disposed of in terms of order dated 16.12.2005, passed in C.W.J.C.Nos. 2320 and 2526 of 2000. Learned counsel submits that petitioners seek regularization of their services. It is further submitted that during pendency of aforesaid analogous writ petitions, the University had filed counter affidavit submitting that the matter had been referred to the Chancellor who directed the University to take appropriate steps for regularization of services of all the daily wagers of Class III and IV posts against the vacant sanctioned posts in compliance of Court’s order passed in C.W.J.C.No. 11854/1999 and prepare a list strictly according to the seniority after complying the requirements of reservation etc. Initially 19 persons had moved this Court in writ 2 petition , out of them one Sahdeo Mahto died. Services of 15 other persons who had moved this Court were regularized. Thus they have been discriminated. Petitioners have also filed representations dated 4.2.2006, annexure 4 and 16.1.2007, annexure 5, but the same have not yet been disposed of by respondents. Petitioners produced a copy of office order dated 8.8.2006. Mr Keshri, learned counsel appearing for the University submits that order of Chancellor was general in nature. However, decision in respect of petitioners have not yet been taken, so if they have grievances, they may seek their remedy in the law. The instant contempt petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to pursue their remedy in the law before appropriate forum. Shashi. ( Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)