Judgment 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State. 2. Pursuant to our order dated 4-10-1993, Shri Mahesh Prasad, Secretary, Department of Aminal Husbandary, Government of Bihar, who is permitted to be impleaded as respondent No. 4 in this writ application, has appeared in person. The reasons for his personal appearance in Court are stated hereinafter. 3. Earliear, only one copy of the writ application used to be served upon learned Counsel for State. Thereafter, High Court Rules were amended and a provision was inserted therein for serving two copies of the writ application upon learned Counsel for State so that immediately after service of the copies, one copy may be sent to the concerned officer for obtaining instruction so that filing of counter affidavit in writ application may not be delayed. According to the amended rules, two copies of the present writ application were served upon learned Counsel for State on 30-4-1992 whereafter on 1-5-1992 letters were written by learned State Counsel to respondents 2 and 3. Upon receipt of the letter, learned State counsel says that some body came either from the office of respondent No. 2 or respondent No. 3 and received one copy of the writ application on 22-5-1992. Thereafter, on 27-8-1993 when the case was placed for admission, statement was made at the bar that no instruction has been received by learned counsel for State. Therefor, the case was adjourned to 29-9-1993 to enable learned counsel for State to obtain instruction. The case was accordingly placed for admission on 29-9-1993, but the same could be taken up only yesterday on 4-10-1993. We were told that on 29-9-1993 leared State counsel personally intimated on telephone to Personal Secreatary to respondent No. 4 requesting him to take all possible steps for filing counter affidavit but, in spite of that, no instruction has been sent to learned counsel for the State. In view of these facts, we directed yesterday learned counsel for State to intimate the secretary (respondent No. 4) for his personal appearance in Court today and, accordingly, the Secretary has appeared before us today. 4. This writ application was filed against the order of termination which was passed on 31-3-1992. The writ application was filed before this Court within a period of one month from the date of termination order after serving two copies thereof upon learned counsel for State. 4. This writ application was filed against the order of termination which was passed on 31-3-1992. The writ application was filed before this Court within a period of one month from the date of termination order after serving two copies thereof upon learned counsel for State. Though a period of about 16 months has expired, but no counter afidavit has been filed in this case. This is not an isolated case in which undue delay has been caused in filing counter-affidavit. It has become regular feature in the State of Bihar to sit fight over the letters of learned State counsel not only by staff of State Government but by its officers as well, howsoever high they may be. It appears to us, that in Bihar every body is conscious towards his right and no body is ready to discharge his legal duties. It is well settled that Law Officers of State Government in the High Court or junior counsel attached to them are officers of the court and if an intimation is given by them to any officer/staff of State Government to meet learned counsel along with instruction to file counter affidavit before this Court, that should be treated to be an intimation on behalf of the Court so that disposal of cases may not be delayed. In our view, it is the duty of every officer/staff of State Government to assist the Court in disposal of cases with utmost expedition. But, instead of doing that, we find here that every body is making attempt so that extraordinary remedy may become infructuous by causing delay in disposal of cases. In view of these facts, we givs following directions to the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, all Department a| Secretaries of Government of Bihar and Director General of Police, Bihar, to issue following orders to the officers/staff of their respective departments : (i) to contact respective State counsel appearing in the High Court along with relevant files together with statement of facts within the time enumerated in the letter received from learned counsel for State upon receipt of letter from them so that filing of counter-affidavit may not be delayed. (ii) if any officer or staff of the respective, department does not comply with the aforeasid direction, then on the matter being reported, the concerned Departmental Secretary should initiate a disciplinary proceeding against him and pass an order of suspension of the concerned person when departmental proceeding is under contemplation ; (iii) the concerned Departmental Secretary should report the matter to this Court about delinquent Officer/staff so that this Court may initiate a proceeding for contempt against him for violation of this order. The Director General-cum-Inspector General of Police, Bihar, Patna, Chief Secretary and all Departmental Secretaries, Government of Bihar, Patna, who are permitted to be impleaded as respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8 respectively will see that a copy of the order as well as a copy of the order passed by them containing therein this aforesaid directions are served upon each and every officer/staff of their departments, whether he is working in the Secretariat or in the district headquater, or subdivisional headquarter or at block level and in token of having received copies, they should take receipt in a register separately maintained for this purpose and the same shall be preserved for ever so that when departmental proceeding is initiated and rule of contempt is issued, no body can say that he had no knowledge either of this order or directions issued by Chief Secretary/Departmental Secretaries/Director General of Police pursuant to this orders. 5 Let two copies of this order be made over to Mr. Prabhat Ranjan, junior counsel to learned Government Pleader No. 2, who,will personally hand over one copy to the Chief Secretary and the other one to the Director General of Police. The Chief Secretary upon receipt of the leller will circulate the same to all Departmental Secretaries. 6. Put up this case for admission on 11-10-1993 on which date counter affidavit must be filed on behalf of State, failing which it will be open to the Court to initiate a proceeding for contempt against the Departmental Secretary (respondent No. 4) who has undertaken to file counter-affidavit on that date.