IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.530 of 2008 ARVIND KUMAR & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 10.08.2009 A show cause has been filed on behalf of the opposite party no.6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the opposite parties. This contempt application is filed for initiating contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for disobedience/non-compliance of the order dated 23rd July, 2007 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 7985 of 2007 (Annexure-1). It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that pursuant to the aforesaid order petitioner filed a representation, although the same has been disposed of but the disposal is not according to law, and as such, the order can not be said to have been complied. Learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that the order of this Court was to consider the representation of the petitioner. The same has been considered as per the order annexed to the show cause filed on behalf of the opposite party no.5 and communicated to the petitioner as per the memo no. 705/Nawadah dated 27th March, 2008. By the 2 aforesaid order it was communicated to the petitioner that the petitioner has passed his teachers’ training examination from Dr. B.C. Roy College, Calcutta, which is not recognized by the National Council of Teachers Education and is also not included in the list of approved colleges maintained by the State of Bihar, as such, no contempt is made out. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the aforesaid order is contrary to the decision of this Court passed on 24th March, 2009 in L.P.A. No. 126 of 2006 as the case of this petitioner as well as the appellant of the said appeal stand on similar footing since the petitioner has also passed the teachers training examination before coming into force of the National Council of Teachers Education Act, 1993 ( N.C.T.E.Act). Having considered the submissions of the parties, it appears that the opposite party had taken a decision as contained in Annexure-1 to the show cause filed on behalf of the opposite party no.5 and communicated the same to the petitioner. Therefore, so far the compliance of the order is concerned, it appears that the opposite parties have complied the order. As regards the correctness or otherwise of the order is concerned, as submitted by the learned 3 counsel for the petitioner, it will be open for the petitioner to assail the same in an appropriate proceeding in accordance with law. In view of the above, the contempt proceeding need not proceed further, and the same is accordingly disposed of. Manish (Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J)