IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.853 of 2007 SACHCHIDA NAND PRASAD YADAV Versus AJEET KUMAR SINGH & ORS ----------- 4. 6.8.2009 From the order dated 29.8.2006 it does not appear that there was any direction of this Court which could be said to have been violated by the opposite parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was an assurance that the remaining dues will reach the petitioner at an early date. From the said order it does not appear that any undertaking was given to the Court rather it was the petitioner who was satisfied and did not choose to further proceed in the matter. In such circumstances, this Court had disposed of the writ application giving the petitioner liberty to take steps for recovering his left out lawful dues, if any. In view of the aforesaid order it is now for the petitioner to take further steps for recovering his left out or lawful dues which cannot be by way of filing a contempt petition. In the said circumstances no case for contempt of Court is made out. The application is, accordingly, dismissed. P. Kumar (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)