Judgment : M. Y. EQBAL, J. ( 1 ) HEARD the parties. ( 2 ) THIS contempt application is arising out of order passed in CWJC No. 290/2001. ( 3 ) WRIT petitioner is the Union of employees working in different departments of the Bihar State Electricity Board. The members of the Union have been working since 20/30/40 years and their date of birth were duly recorded in the service record. However, all of a sudden, the authority of the Board issued a general order directing all the employees to appear before the Medical Board for the assessment of age. The said general order was challenged by the Union by filing CWJC No. 290/2001 on the ground inter alia that the authority of the Board without assigning any reason and without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, cannot compel the employees who worked about 30-40 years to go for medical examination for assessment of age. This Court finding prima facie case, directed Mrs. I. Sen Choudhary, learned Counsel for the Board to file counter-affidavit. This Court by order dated 25-1-2001 further directed the respondents not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner, till further order is passed. ( 4 ) PETITIONERs case is that the order dated 25-1-2000 was duly communicated to the respondents including the contemnor, opposite party No. 4, who is Deputy Director (Personnel) (Officiating), Patratu Thermal Power Station, Patratu, Hazaribagh. It is stated that in spite of receipt of aforesaid order, he continuously issued letters to the employees asking them to appear for medical examination, failing which they shall be proceeded departmentally. A show-cause has been filed by the opposite party No. 4. Paras 4 and 5 of the show-cause are reproduced herein below :"that in the instant case, this opposite party No. 4 does admit that some omission and commission have been made on his behalf for which he is extremely sorry and prays for unconditional apology for the same to this Honble Court. Paras 4 and 5 of the show-cause are reproduced herein below :"that in the instant case, this opposite party No. 4 does admit that some omission and commission have been made on his behalf for which he is extremely sorry and prays for unconditional apology for the same to this Honble Court. That the order dated 25-1-2001 passed by the Honble Court in CWJC No. 290 of 2001 was communicated to the General Manager, P. T. P. S. by the Law Advisor, B. S. E. B. Doranda, Ranchi vide his letter No. 764 dated 5-2-2001 and the General Manager, P. T. P. S. forwarded the same to this answering respondent No. 4, on 15-2-2001 and accordingly the same came into the knowledge of this respondent No. 4, on 16-2-2001. " ( 5 ) THE contemnor-opposite party No. 4 therefore admitted that even after receipt of the interim order passed by this Court, he continuously issued letters in utter disregard and disobedience of the said order. Annexures-8, 8/1 and 9 are the letters issued by the opposite party No. 4 to different employees threatening them to appear before the Medical Board, otherwise they shall be proceeded departmentally. Although opposite party No. 4 was aware of the interim order passed by this Court, the petitioner-Union sent reminder dated 17-5-2001 to opposite party No. 4 requesting him not to proceed in view of the interim order passed by this Court. In spite of the aforesaid letter, opposite party No. 4 issued letters on 29-5-2001, 2-6-2001, 7-6-2001 to the different employees of the Board compelling them to get themselves medically examined. Not only that even on 1-9-2001 opposite party No. 4 issued letters to the employees to immediately contact him within three days in connection with their medical examination. It is, therefore, clear that contemnor opposite party No. 4 deliberately and wilfully, not once but continuously disregarded the order of this Court. Mrs. I. Sen Choudhary, learned Counsel for the Board-Contemnor opposite party No. 4 submitted that except tendering unqualified apology, opposite party No. 4 cannot satisfactorily explain his conduct. ( 6 ) UNCONDITIONAL apology is not a complete answer to violation and infraction of Courts order. Mrs. I. Sen Choudhary, learned Counsel for the Board-Contemnor opposite party No. 4 submitted that except tendering unqualified apology, opposite party No. 4 cannot satisfactorily explain his conduct. ( 6 ) UNCONDITIONAL apology is not a complete answer to violation and infraction of Courts order. If the officer like opposite party No. 4, who is just officiating the post of the Deputy Director (Personnel) has the guts to disregard the order of this Court, then it will amount to failure of entire system. Petitioner has acted deliberately to subvert the order of this Court. It is necessary to eraze an impression which appears to be gaining ground that unconditional apology is complete answer to violation and infraction of the Courts order. I am afraid if such officer is posted in regular post then he will make even the Constitution, not only the Court, a mockery. Accordingly, I reject the unconditional apology tendered by opposite party No. 4 and hold him guilty of contempt of this Court. I do hereby censure his conduct and direct the Chairman of the Board to immediately remove him from the post, where he is officiating. A copy of this order shall form part of his annual confidential report/record of his service. Although the O. P. No. 4 deserves for fine and exemplary cost but I am leaving him for the present. ( 7 ) LET a copy of this order be immediately sent to the Chairman of the Board for compliance. Let it be clarified that any letter issued by any of the authority of the Board including the contemnor after the interim order passed by this Court that shall not be given effect to till further order is passed in that writ application. With the aforesaid observation and direction this contempt application is disposed of. Order accordingly. --- *** --- .