IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
MJC No.1255 of 2009
SMT.SUNITA DEVI @ SUNITA KUMARI & ORS .
Versus
MR.ANUPAM KUMAR .
-----------
3/ 25/08/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned counsel for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly
submits that in pursuance of the direction of the writ
court the representation has been disposed. Alleging non-
compliance of the orders of the writ court it is submitted
that the disposal of the representation is not in
consonance with the law as it is contrary to certain
orders of this Court on similar matters.
The petitioners appear to have been in an
extreme haste for disposal of their writ application. They
only sought a direction for disposal of their
representation in light of certain orders of this Court.
What was the content of the representation or what were
the similar orders of the Court, of what nature and in
what context was also not considered relevant to be
pressed before this Court.
A contempt proceeding shall lie only for
disobedience of a specific direction given. The direction
was to dispose off the representation. That having been
done, this Court finds it difficult to proceed any further in
-2-
the contempt jurisdiction.
If the petitioners are of the opinion that the
disposal of the representation ignores certain specified
judgments of this Court, their remedy lies in a fresh writ
application.
The application is dismissed.
KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)