IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2653 of 2003 BAIDYANATH PANDIT & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS -With- MJC No.2176 of 2002 RAM PRASAD & ORS Versus P.N.NARAYANAN & ORS ----------- 6. 18.9.2008. The petitioners have filed these contempt applications against an interim order passed in C. W. J. C. No. 6488 of 2002 wherein it has been stated that “no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners in pursuance of the order Annexure-6 series” By Annexure-6 series, the petitioners were reverted from work charge establishment on the post of daily wages. This matter was eventually heard by a Division Bench in C.W.J.C.No.7359 of 2002 and analogous cases wherein the writ petitions of these petitioners were also considered. This Court constituted a committee to examine the cases of daily wages employees in the light of the case of Uma Devi. In pursuance to the direction of this Court, the case of the petitioners was examined and the petitioners have been regularized vide Memo No.1126 dated 28.11.2006. Learned counsel for the State submits that the original contempt was filed against an interim order and since the interim order has now merged with the final order, nothing further need to be done in the contempt application. Learned counsel for the petitioners refers to the order of this - 2 - Court dated 19.1.2005 in which it has been stated that the opposite parties have requested time from this Court to comply with the order with respect to the payment of salaries to the petitioners for the post which the petitioners were holding prior to 23.5.2002. In my opinion, all these orders have merged with the final order, and as such, it can not be said that the contempt has been made out against the opposite parties. However, since the petitioners have been regularized, the question of payment of the salaries will naturally have to be considered by the proper authority. Considering the submissions aforesaid, the contempt application is dismissed. U.K. (Sheema Ali Khan,J)