IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.4373 of 2010 MD. MANZAR IMAM . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. . ----------- 3. 20.4.2011 Learned counsel for the opposite parties produces letter No. 254 dated 19.4.2011 issued by the Principal Secretary, Department of Public, Health and Engineering, Government of Bihar and submits that directions have been given to the Executive Engineer, Purnea to pay consequential benefits to the petitioner at the earliest. Counsel for the petitioner submits that this is not compliance of the order of the Court. A copy of the order produced has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner also. Technically, the contention of the petitioner is sound. It is unfortunate that the Court has to virtually assume the nature and role of an Execution Munsif for implementation of the orders passed on a writ petition. What should have been done by the respondents initially was presented in a truncated compliance on 10.1.2011 by the Principal Secretary. The indulgence granted to him by the Court does not appear to have been fully appreciated. Rather than to keep the present application 2 pending as suggested on behalf of the petitioner to ensure that actual payment is made to the petitioner, the Court treats the order dated 19.4.2011 passed during pending of the proceedings in the present contempt application as a solemn undertaking by the Principal Secretary to the Court in the present proceedings that actual physical monetary payments shall be paid to the petitioner assured, by the Principal Secretary himself, within a maximum period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/presentation of a copy of this order before the Principal Secretary. Should the Principal Secretary breach the undertaking and assurance by him to this Court in a judicial proceeding based on the recitals contained in the order dated 19.4.2011, the Court may be constrained to proceed appropriately against the Principal Secretary. The application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)