IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2562 of 2010 SUNIL KUMAR JHA . Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. . ----------- 2. 30.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the opposite parties. The petitioner had made a grievance against the order of the Commissioner rejecting his plea for salary for the specified period on the principle of no work no pay. The writ Court noticed that the impugned order did not answer the crucial issue whether the petitioner was discharging duties or not even at the wrong place. Directions were therefore issued to pass a fresh, reasoned and speaking order dealing specifically with the issue as to whether after the alleged wrong joining in the office of the Commissioner, Muzaffarpur, the petitioner continued to work, mark attendance and discharge duties or not and then pass appropriate order for the claim of salary. The fresh order has been passed by the Commissioner on 7.5.2010 at Annexure-G to the counter affidavit. It states that the petitioner gave his joining and did not come to the office and did not mark attendance. Reminders were sent to him but he refused to respond. Counsel for the petitioner strenuously 2 sought to persuade the Court that the petitioner was not allowed to mark attendance and not allowed to discharge duty in the office at Muzaffarpur. The contentions of the petitioner are issues of facts which are required to be specifically pleaded, considered and adjudicated to test the correctness of the recitals in the order dated 7.5.2010, that obviously does not fall within the domain of the contempt jurisdiction. If so advised, the petitioner may avail is remedy, if any, afresh in a writ application. The contempt proceeding stands disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)