IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.3134 of 1998 ASHWINI KUMAR SINHA & ANR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the petitioners : Mr.Prabhat Ranjan, Advocate For the respondents : Mr. Kameshwar Prasad Gupta, Standing Counsel-V ------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal Dated, the 24th July, 2008. This is a second round of litigation concerning non- compliance of the order dated 4th January, 1993 by the respondents. 2. In the writ petition filed by the petitioners, a direction was sought commanding the respondents to fix their permanent cadre as they claimed to be successful candidates of 30th Combined Competitive Examination held by the Bihar Public Service Commission. 3. The writ petition came to be disposed of on 4th of January, 1993 by the following order: “5. Accordingly, we allow this writ petition in part with a direction to the respondents to do the needful in regard to the claim of the petitioners in terms of the stand taken aforementioned, preferably within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by the Chief Secretary (Respondent no.2)” 4. It may be noticed here that initially an application was - 2 - made by the respondents seeking extension of time for compliance of the order dated 4th of January, 1993. This court by its order dated 19th of April, 1993 extended the time up to 7th of July, 1993. 5. The petitioners filed contempt application being MJC No.50 of 1994 alleging non-compliance of the order dated 4th of January, 1993. The said contempt application came to be disposed of on 26th of March, 1996 by the following order: “ It has been submitted by Shri K.P.Yadav, Standing Counsel No.V that he has received instruction from the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Bihar to the effect that absorption of the petitioner, which has been done by notification dated 9.2.1996 is on a cadre post. In view of this our order appears to have been complied with substantially and so this matter is dropped. We may observe that the petitioners will also get protection of pay and will get total emoluments and not less than what they were getting before the notification was issued.” 6. Now by this contempt application, the petitioners have raised the grievance that post of Child Development Project Officer is not a cadre post and, thus, the respondents are guilty of contempt for having not complied with the order dated 4th January, 1993. 7. A show cause has been filed by opposite party no.3. The opposite party no.4 has filed separate show cause. They have reiterated that the post of Child Development Project Officer has been made permanent cadre post under the Welfare Department of Bihar vide Notification no. 139 dated 11th January, 1996. It is, thus, the defence of the respondents that the order dated 4th of January, 1993 has been complied with. - 3 - 8. The issue as to whether the post of Child Development Project Officer is a permanent cadre post or not cannot be gone into in these proceedings as the petitioners want us to do. The notification dated 11th January, 1996 is clear that post of Child Development Project Officer is a permanent cadre post. If the petitioners had any grievance concerning the legality of the Notification dated 09th of February, 1996, they ought to have challenged the same in appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. The legality of notification dated 11th January, 1996 cannot be put in issue by way of contempt application. 9. We are, thus, satisfied that nothing further needs to be done in this contempt application. MJC stands disposed of. R.M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J. sunil