IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.3186 of 2007 RAM KRISHNA SAHAY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 5 6.10.2009 It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the opposite parties have not paid subsistence allowance for the entire period of suspension. The stand of the opposite parties is that the petitioner did not give his joining after he was put under suspension and he gave his joining subsequently on 6.5.2005 and for the entire remaining period from 6.5.2005 to 6.2.2006 he has been paid the subsistence allowance and thus the order under contempt is complied with. In the above circumstances, the contempt application is dismissed. The petitioner shall have the liberty to challenge the order for not paying subsistence allowance for the said period in appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. shahid (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J)