Ravi S.Dhavan, J.

1. This appeal under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1972 has, been filed against an order dated 24 September, 2001, a proceeding in civil contempt, numbered as MJC. No. 2240 of 1999: Smt. Chintamani Sinha V/s. State of Bihar and others. On 16 July, 2001, the array of parties was permitted to be amended. The appellant had been added as an opposite party no. 7, Sri A.K. Upadhyay, Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. Thus, initially, the appellant was not a party to the cause. By this order, the petitioner Smt. Chintamani Sinha also received an order of the court that she may file a fresh representation before the Commissioner-cum-Secretary of the department and the latter may have the opportunity to consider the claim and pass a reasoned order. The representation was permitted to be filed within a week. Thereafter, Commissioner-cum-Secretary of the Road Construction Department was given time to act on the representation within three weeks. Thus, it is on record that the Commissioher-cum-Secretary of the Road Construction Department, who happens to be the appellant comes into the picture on the order dated 16 July 2001.

2. The record will need to be explained on the controversies. The petitioners husband, the late Bal Mukund Sinha, died on 29.4.1998. He had joined service as an Assistant Engineer in October 1973 in the Advance Planning Division of the Rural Engineering Organisation at Hazaribagh. After his death his widow sought the emoluments due to her husband as a consequence of the State services rendered. The following claims were made upon the department:

(1) Earned leave from 10 July 1987 to 23 August 1987, (2) compulsory waiting period as duty from 14 August 1987 to 10 July 1988, (3) regularisation for period of compulsory waiting for 172 days, (4) arrears of salary, between February 1994 until his death on 29 April 1998, (5) time bound promotion after completing 10 years of service as an Assistant Engineer on the basis of a notification no. 946 dated 26.2.1990 in the old scale of pay of Rs. 1350-50-1700-75-2000/- effective from 23 June 1986, and (6) demand of a form to fill and apply for receiving the pensionary dues, family pension and other pensionary benefits such as group insurance, general provident fund, leave encashment and arrears of pay.

3. Finding that the post retirement benefits due to her husband and her widows pension were not being paid she filed a writ petition, CWJC. No. 9237 of 1998: Smt. Chintamani Sinha V/s. State of Bihar. On the petition the following order was passed:

"15.1.1999. Petitioner has approached this Court for issuing a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay her arrears of salary and retiral benefits of her deceased husband. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. From paragraph 8 of the writ petition, I find that the petitioner has made a representation to the respondent no. 1 on 11.8.1998 for the redress of her grievance and as such, I am not inclined to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution at this stage. In my view, it will subserve the interest of justice if the respondent no. 1 is directed to decide the pending representation of the petitioner expeditiously. I, accordingly, dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondent no. 1, the Commissioner and Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, to decide the pending representation of the petitioner in accordance with law by a speaking order within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order on him. The claim of the petitioner for arrears of salary will also be considered within the same period. The amount found due to the petitioner will be paid to her within one month from the date of disposal of her representation, with statutory interest."

4. It needs to be mentioned that at the time when this order was passed the State of Bihar and the respondents arrayed in