IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.351 of 2011 Ranju Devi . Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors . ----------- 3. 06.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Opposite Parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order remains uncomplied and the representation of the petitioner has not been disposed. Counsel for the opposite parties submits from Paragraph-6 of the same that with regard to the educational qualification of the petitioner the District Magistrate had sought guidelines and information from the Department of Human Resources if the certificate issued by the Central Board of Higher Education, New Delhi was recognized or not by the Human Resources Department. In the previous week this Court in a writ application on a similar issue had directed the Central Board of Higher Education, New Delhi to be made a party respondent and notices have been issued to it. The only question in this writ application is that whether Paragraph-6 of the show cause constitutes a valid defence in a contempt proceeding or not as a valid reason for inability to comply the 2 order of the Court. The Court is satisfied that it does. The contempt application is disposed with the observation that let the Department of Human Resources furnish its reply to the query of the District Magistrate forthwith to enable the District Magistrate to pass final appropriate orders thereafter in accordance with law within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before him. The application is disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)