IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.269 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4121 of 2014 ====================================================== Mithilesh Kumar Singh Son of Pradeep Singh, resident of Mohalla- Malaipur, P.O.- Shaligrampur, P.S.- Sahebpur Kalam, District- Begusarai, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Patna and Ors 2. Mr. Vinay Kumar, The Principal Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Government of Bihar 3. Mr. Ritesh Kumar, The Engineer In Chief, Public Health Engineering Department, Government of Bihar, 4. Mr. V.K. Srivastava, The Superintending Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Government 5. Mr. Ajit Kumar, The Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Government of Bihar, ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Alok Ranjan, AC to AAG-5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 15 18-08-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The present contempt application has been filed for disobedience of the order dated 11.09.2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 4121 of 2014. 3. The operative portion of the order is as hereinunder: “ In view of the facts and discussions, made above, I find that the order, as contained in Annexure-4, is bad and, accordingly, the same is set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the Patna High Court MJC No.269 of 2018(15) dt.18-08-2026 2/3 petitioners for their regularization as the case of the petitioners stands on the same footing as that of Manoj Kumar Paswan, who has already been appointed, within three months from the date of receipt/production of this order.” 4. A supplementary show cause has been filed on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 to 5 bringing on record the fact that the said order of the writ court was challenged before the Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 247 of 2018 which was stood disposed of on 18.10.2022 with the following observation: “ The same shall be highlighted in the speaking order. If the respondents-petitioners are otherwise footing on par with Manoj Kumar Paswan. In that event, the competent authority/appellant is hereby directed to proceed to appoint respondent-petitioners on par with Manoj Kumar Paswan. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order.” 5. Pursuant to the aforesaid order dated 18.10.2022, the office of the Executive Engineer, Public Health Division, Munger considered the case of the petitioner and by a detailed reasoned and speaking order concluded upon scrutiny and consideration that the case of this petitioner and others were found to be distinct from the case of Manoj Kumar Paswan and as such, it was not in accordance with law to regularize the service of the petitioner. Patna High Court MJC No.269 of 2018(15) dt.18-08-2026 3/3 6. Taking into consideration the supplementary show cause and especially Annexure-B thereof, no cause of action remains in this contempt application. 7. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to challenge the order of the concerned authority. 8. Accordingly, the present contempt application is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. devendra/- (Soni Shrivastava, J) U