IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1799 of 2010 SUSHMA KUMARI . Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. . ----------- 3. 12.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The order on the writ petition was to dispose the representation only. The opposite parties from Annexure-E to the show cause contend that it has been disposed. The petitioner contends that Annexure-E pertains to the pre-counseling list and not to the post-counseling list and the opposite parties wrongly contends that she never participated in the counseling. From the order of the writ petition it appears that the petitioner was in extreme haste for disposal of the writ petition and did not even desire any consideration on merits. In the nature of the order of the writ petition where there has been no adjudication on merits with direction of any particular nature except for disposal of the representation, that having been done, the Court finds it difficult to proceed further in the contempt jurisdiction. The application stands disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)