IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1311 of 2009 BAXI ARUN KUMAR SINGH . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR . ----------- 03. 03.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation. The claims relate to a period when the petitioner was employed in the State of Bihar. Her services have subsequently been allocated to the State of Jharkhand consequent to reorganization of the State and the bifurcation of the Road Transport Corporation. Learned counsel for the Corporation places a Cheque drawn in favour of the petitioner on the Bank of Baroda, Patna Main Branch, bearing no. 544749 for a sum of Rs. 1,26,544/- after adjusting the three months advance service pay for the period in question. The Cheque is handed over to the counsel for the petitioner during the course of the proceedings. That satisfies the order on the writ petition. Learned counsel for the Corporation next submits that the Supreme Court has given certain directions consequent to the bifurcation of the Corporation with regard to the respective liabilities of the State of Bihar and the State of Jharkhand as per the Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Sagir Ahmed, Arbitration 2 Committee. The period in question with regard to the petitioner falls in the category for which liability has been fastened upon the State of Jharkhand. The Corporation therefore proposes to move the State of Jharkhand appropriately for reimbursement of the amount in question. Quite naturally, the State of Jharkhand is expected to act in accordance with law in light of any directions that may have been given by the Supreme Court. There is no occasion for this Court to make any further observation with regard to the same as it does not have the benefit of hearing the State of Jharkhand which is not a party in the present proceedings. The contempt application is disposed as infructuous. P.K. ( Navin Sinha, J.)