JUDGMENT M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J. 1. Ripusudan Dubey, the petitioner, has filed this contempt application to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents for their willful and deliberate non-compliance of the interim order dated 23.8.2005 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P (S) No. 3970/2005. 2. The short facts leading to filing of this contempt application are as follows: The petitioner filed a writ application, W.P.(S) No. 3970/2005 with the prayer for quashing the resolution dated 31.3.2003 issued by the Commissioner- cum-Secretary, Personnel & Administrative Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, whereunder the Government of Jharkhand took a decision in respect of the seniority of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Government servants, which is said to have been issued in pursuance of the 85th Amendment of the Constitution of India amending Article 16(4A) thereof. As per the final gradation list of the cadre to which the petitioner belonged published by the State of Bihar on 15.7.2000, the position of the petitioner is at serial No. 95. In the said seniority list, the names of S/Sri Vishnu Ram, Ram Deo Paswan, Jay Prakash, Yadunandan Choudhary and Bhagwan Choudhary stand at Sl. Nos. 362, 429, 367, 369 and 363 respectively. As per the list, these persons are junior to the petitioner. In the meantime, the writ petition has been filed and at that time, an interim order passed on 23.5.2005, which is quoted below: 3/23.8.2005 Put up this case after disposal of the matter pending before the Supreme Court being Writ Petition (Civil) No. 61/02. In the meantime, respondents shall not revert the petitioner, nor affect his seniority in the gradation list. According to the petitioner, despite the interim order dated 23.8.2005, his seniority, by notification dated 28.11.2005, is published showing the, other persons referred to above senior to him, which has directly affected the standing of the petitioner in the gradation list. Therefore, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court by filing this contempt application for violation of the order dated 23.8.2005. 3. According to the Advocate General appearing for the respondents, the order dated 28.11.2005 is amended by the notification dated 29.6.2006. The said order dated 29.6.2006 has been challenged by one Bishnu Ram in W.P.(S) No 2748/2006, wherein it is ordered that the notification should not be given effect to. That is how, the order dated 25.7.2006 becomes effective. 3. According to the Advocate General appearing for the respondents, the order dated 28.11.2005 is amended by the notification dated 29.6.2006. The said order dated 29.6.2006 has been challenged by one Bishnu Ram in W.P.(S) No 2748/2006, wherein it is ordered that the notification should not be given effect to. That is how, the order dated 25.7.2006 becomes effective. Further, the interim order was passed only pending the matter in the Supreme Court. 4. Now it is brought to the notice of this Court by the Advocate General that the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 61/02 in the Supreme Court has finally been disposed of by the Honble Supreme Court, vide order dated 19.10.2006, upholding the 85th Amendment to the Constitution of India. Therefore, the question of committing contempt of the order dated 23.8.2005 does not arise, since the said order says that the same will be in force till the final disposal of the matter by the Honble Supreme Court Admittedly, the Supreme Court passed the final order on 19.10.2006. 5. It is further submitted by the Advocate General that the petitioner is holding the substantive post of Executive Engineer and was only in-charge of the post of Chief Engineer in his own pay scale. As such, no promotion was given to him either on the post of Superintending Engineer or on the post of Chief Engineer. He was only the Executive Engineer and as the post of Chief Engineer was vacant, he was made in charge of the same. As a matter of fact, subsequent to the order passed on 23.8.2005, the petitioner joined in Industry Department on 9.10.2006 as Executive Engineer and remained there without any protest. Thereafter, he was posted in Jharkhand Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation, Ranchi, vide order dated 4.1.2007, as Executive Engineer. 6. It is vehemently contended by the counsel for the petitioner refuting the statement of Advocate General on the basis of the merits of the matter by citing various authorities, I am not inclined to accept the said contention at this stage. 7. In view of the fact that already Supreme Court has disposed of the matter, the interim order dated 23.8.2005 cannot be said to have been violated, on account of the fact that the order must be construed to be in force only till the date of order of the Supreme Court, i.e. 19.10.2006. 8. 7. In view of the fact that already Supreme Court has disposed of the matter, the interim order dated 23.8.2005 cannot be said to have been violated, on account of the fact that the order must be construed to be in force only till the date of order of the Supreme Court, i.e. 19.10.2006. 8. Now it is contended that the main writ petition is still pending and the merits of the prayer made therein can be decided in the writ petition itself. The petitioner is at liberty to raise all the points raised herein before the learned Single Judge who deals with the writ petition, W.P (S) No. 3970/2005. The contempt application is dismissed.