IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1641 of 2008 1. UMA SHANKAR LAL, S/O SRI BAIJNATH YADAV, R/O VILLAGE-SHYAMDEV, P.S.-DHAMAUL, DISTRICT- NAWADA. 2. BINDU KUMARI, W/O SRI SHUDHIR KUMAR SUDHAKAR, R/O VILLAGE-THALI KHURD, P.S.-GOVINDPUR, DISTRICT-NAWADA. ……………PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SRI ANJANI KUMAR SINGH, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITOINERS, THE COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. SRI ANJANI KUMAR SINGH, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITOINERS, THE COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. SRI ASHOK KUMAR SINGH, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITOINERS, THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, GOVT.OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 4. SRI YOGENDRA BHAKTA, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITOINERS, THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, NAWADA. 5. SRI RAM SAKAL SINGH, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, NAWADA. 6. SHEKH JIYAUL HASAN, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITONERS, THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, PAKARIBARAWAN, BLOCK, NAWADA 7. SRI MUMUSU KUMAR CHOUDHARY, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITONERS, THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER GOVINDPUR BLOCK, NAWADA. 8. KUMARI DEEPA RANI, D/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, PAKARI BARWAN BLOCK, NAWADA. 9. SRI MATI NEELAM RANI, W/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, GOVINDPUR BLOCK, NAWADA. 10.SRI RAVINDRA SINGHF, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT DHAMAUL, DISTRICT-NAWADA. 11.MD.ANAMUL HAQ ANSARI, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT BUDHWARA, DISTRICT-NAWADA. 12.SRIMATI SUNAINA DEVI, W/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, THE MUKHIYA DHAMAUL GRAM PANCHAYAT, DISTRICT-NAWADA. 13.SRI MUNSHI RAM, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, THE MUKHIYA, BUDHWARA GRAM PANCHAYAT, DISTRICT-NAWADA. ………OPP. PARTIES. ---------------------------------- 2 22 30.11.2011 Pursuant to the earlier order dated 13.10.2011, respondent nos. 10 and 11 are personally present in Court. They have also filed their show cause. After going through the show cause, learned counsel for the petitioners accepts that the orders of this Court have been complied with and both the petitioners have received their arrears of salary in full. In that view of the matter, this Court does not consider it necessary to proceed in the matter further. The proceeding is dropped and the rule is discharged. This contempt application is disposed of. However, it is directed that the opposite party no.10 who had to comply the order shall bear the cost of traveling to Patna in connection with this case from his own pocket and shall not raise any bill for instructing the counsel or taking steps in the case in any manner. Arvind/ ( J.N. Singh, J.)