IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2486 of 2011 Ashok Kumar Singh son of Sri Ram Ekbal Singh, resident of Pachlakh, P.S.-Parsa, District-Chapra, Saran, at present Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. ........Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through Mr. Anup Kumar Mukherjee, Chief Secretary, Bihar. 2. Mr. B Rajendra Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Mr. Arun Chandra Singh, Special Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. Mr. Anil Kumar, Superintending Engineer (Flying Squad) Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. .........Opposite Parties ----------- 08 21.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite parties. 2. In compliance of the order dated 14.09.2011, Mr. B. Rajendra, the present Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna is present in Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the opposite parties have violated the specific directions of this Court vide order dated 13.06.2011, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 9379 of 2011, by which the operation of the order of the petitioner’s suspension dated 07.06.2011 was stayed. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that it is apparent from Annexures 3 and 4 of the petition that the petitioner had himself assumed charge as Executive Engineer in the Rural Works Department in view of the aforesaid order of this Court and information with respect thereto had been given by him to the higher authorities. There is nothing to show that the authorities 2 concerned ever passed any order against it or disturbed him in his functions. 5. So far the statement made in paragraph no. 14 of show cause dated 20.07.2011 as well as the statement made in paragraph no. 4 of the supplementary show cause dated 05.09.2011 are concerned, it is accepted by him as mistakes in the drafting and was not intentionally made by the answering opposite parties as the jurisdiction of the parties under the rules concerned were always subject to the orders of this Court and the other Bench of this Court did not vacate the order of this Court dated 13.06.2011 rather dismiss the writ petition, as a result of which the said order automatically stood vacated. For this, learned counsel for the opposite parties tenders their unqualified apology. 6. Accordingly, the matter is dropped and this petition is disposed of. Safik (S.N. Hussain, J.)