IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2162 of 2008 PROF. RAMAWATAR SINGH, aged about 70 years, son of late Daya Nand Singh, resident of village Bhewar, P.S. Karuna, District Jehanabad------petitioner Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.Mr.Anjani Prasad, the Principal Secretary Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Patna 3.Mr.Dhananjay Prasad, the Director Department of Higher Education, Government of Bihar, Patna 4.Mr.B.N.Pandey, Vice Chancellor, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya 5.Mr.D.K.Yadav, Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya, Gaya 6.Mr.M.K.Thakur, the Finance Officer, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya, Gaya 7.Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh, Principal, College of Commerce, Kankarbagh, Patna 8.Mr.Laxman Ram, Senior Auditor-I, Camp Magadh University, Bodh Gaya -----opp.parties ----------- 10. 14.7.2010 In the order under contempt the direction was to pay the remaining dues of the petitioner within the time stated therein. Thereafter an amount of Rs.1,36,863/- was recommended to be paid to the petitioner by the Audit Team of the Finance Department deputed to Magadh University. The opposite parties were asked to explain as to how the amount was payable to the petitioner as compared to the amount of Rs.5,93,930/- which was payable as per the report submitted by the University. In the show cause filed on behalf of opposite party No.8, Senior Auditor of the Finance Department, it is stated that the date of absorption of the petitioner has been shifted from 19.1.1976 to 1.1.1981 in terms of the orders dated 9.5.2009 and 14.8.2009 of the University as also the 2 letter of the Human Resources Department of the State Government dated 4.9.2009 and thus the amount payable to the petitioner is Rs.1,36,863/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner had earlier been granted time to consider the show cause but no reply to the said show cause has been filed controverting the stand taken therein. That being the position, it is not for this Court in its contempt jurisdiction to consider the validity or otherwise of the said action of the opposite parties. The order under contempt appears to have been substantially complied with. The contempt application is therefore dismissed. (Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.) Spal/