IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.157 of 2006 USHA DEVI & ANR Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Anil Kr. Jha, Adv. For the Opposite parties : JC to G.P.XII ---------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ----------- Dated, the 9th July, 2008. The petitioners, who are Assistant Teachers in primary school, challenged the order of transfer by filing the writ petition (C.W.J.C. No. 11527 of 2005). 2. By its order dated 13.9.2005, this Court permitted the petitioners to make representation before the competent authority and the competent authority was directed to dispose of the same by reasoned order within a period of two months from the date of such representation. 3. Both the petitioners pursued the order dated 13.9.2005 and made their respective representation on 26.9.2005. 4. The grievance of the petitioners is that the said representations have not been considered and disposed of by reasoned order, although they were directed to do that by order dated - 2 - 13.9.2005. 5. In response to this contempt application, cause has been shown by the Opposite party no.4. It is stated therein that in view of composite exercise of transfer of primary teachers being already in process, it was thought fit that individual representations may not be decided and accordingly both the representations were dismissed on 17.12.2005 and petitioners were communicated of the said decision. 6. Strictly speaking the dismissal of the two representations vide order dated 17.12.2005, may not be in compliance of the order dated 13.9.2005. However, on such a technical plea, we are of the view that the opposite parties have not exposed themselves to contempt jurisdiction of this Court. The reason for this is that in view of the composite exercise of transfer of Assistant Teachers being already on, the authorities decided not to deal with individual representations. Since with a bonfide view, the individual representations were not decided, we are satisfied that nothing further needs to be done in this contempt petition. 7. M.J.C. is disposed of accordingly. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J Pawan/-