IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.245 of 2008 1. Amirak Mali, Son of Late Prabhu Mali, resident of village-Samas Baluapar, P.S.-Sarai, District-Nalanda. 2. Monkeshwar Shukla, Son of Late Shri Bhola Shukla, resident of village- Semara, P.S.-Ram Nagar, District-West Champaran. –Petitioners. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Sri Raj Kumar Singh, Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Sri Sudarshan Ram, Engineer-in-Chief, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. Sri Ganesh Chaudhary, Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. Sri Chandeshwar Ram, Chief Engineer, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 6. Sri Shivendra Pasi, Superintending Engineer, Central Circle, Road Construction Department, Patna. 7. Sri Chandra Shekhar, Executive Engineer, Western Division, Road Construction Department, Patna. 8. Dr. B. Rajendra, District Magistrate, Patna. –Opposite Parties. ----------- 02 31.03.2011 The petitioners had come to this Court for regularization of his services. In the writ petition, this Court having found itself not in position to issue any positive direction directed the authorities to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization in terms of the circular of the Government as referred to in the writ petition. By this contempt petition itself it is alleged that the authorities did not act and, as such, had committed contempt. A show cause has been filed wherein it is stated that order has been passed and annexed that regularization has been refused. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the authorities has deliberately misinterpreted the circular and wrongly applied the provisions thereof to disentitle the petitioners. - 2 - Having considered the matter, in my view, even if the petitioner is correct in what he submits that would not make it a case of contempt. This Court did not give any positive direction as to what decision has to be taken. The decision may be right or wrong. Decision having been taken, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the same, it would be open to the petitioner to challenge the same in a fresh writ petition or any other forum to which he may be advised. This application is, thus, disposed of. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)