JUDGMENT : 1. Mr. Jai Prakash, the learned Additional Advocate General appears for the respondent-State. 2. Finally the dispute between the parties seems to have settled, at least for the present, when responding to the proposal for referring the dispute for adjudication to Lok Adalat, the respondents filed an affidavit dated 30.08.2017 consenting for the aforesaid proposal in these words : “6. That it is humbly stated and submitted that on the above proposal the respondents have no any objection if the matter may be referred for the adjudication to the 'Lok Adalat'.” 3. From the stand taken by the respondent-State, it appears that the respondents have disputed the number of superstructure toilets constructed by the writ-petitioners. The enquiry report by SDO, Ghatshila has been placed on record. The petitioners have also produced voluminous documents including photographs to assert that they have constructed superstructure toilets for which work order was issued to them. The petitioner no.1 claims that he has constructed 1369 units total payment due for which is Rs.18,71,080/-; petitioner no.2 constructed 1096 units for Rs.14,03,200/-; petitioner no.3 constructed 805 units for Rs.9,66,000/- and petitioner no.4 has claimed that he has constructed 463 units for which amount due is Rs.10,18,600/-. 4. The writ-petition being W.P.(C) No.6090/2013 was preferred by the petitioners for a direction upon the respondents for payment of admitted dues. The petitioners were issued work orders for construction of integrated household latrines called superstructure toilets under Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan. Taking note of the stand taken by the respondents and the communications placed on record, a direction was issued to the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman, District Water and Sanitation Mission, East Singhbhum for payment of completed work to the petitioners. Now, the parties have agreed for reference to the dispute to the Permanent Lok Adalat on the following “terms of reference”: “To quantify the legally payable amount to the petitioners against the actual construction of superstructure toilets, as per work order, on the basis of materials placed before the writ-Court and in the present proceeding.” 5. It is stated that construction of superstructure toilets was complete in the year 2010 and a physical verification report was submitted by the Block Development Officer on 03.05.2012. About seven years have lapsed since superstructure toilets were constructed, is a fact to be kept in mind. It is stated that construction of superstructure toilets was complete in the year 2010 and a physical verification report was submitted by the Block Development Officer on 03.05.2012. About seven years have lapsed since superstructure toilets were constructed, is a fact to be kept in mind. Now, the parties have agreed that the decision on payment to the petitioners for construction of toilets shall be taken on the basis of the photographs, report of Block Development Officer and other materials on record. Accordingly, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the instant Contempt petition and Review petition stand disposed of, in the above terms. 6. Let a decision by the Permanent Lok Adalat be taken within a period of three months. 7. Let a copy of this order be transmitted to Member-Secretary, JHALSA, Ranchi.