Disposed¶29

Pranav Kumar Garg v. Manoj Kumar Pingua IAS

Chhattisgarh HC3 Sept 2025CONT/337/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur; CONT No. 337 of 2025; decided 04.09.2025 by Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Contempt petition by five Pharmacist Grade-II jail pharmacists disposed of after respondents reported compliance through order dated 29.08.2025 granting pay scale equal to Pharmacists Grade-II with effect from 01.04.2006 and undertaking payment of arrears within three months; petitioners chose not to press the petition; liberty reserved to revive the prayer if occasion arises. No statute or precedent cited or discussed in the order.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition disposed of at this stage with liberty reserved to the petitioners to revive their prayer if occasion so arises. ¶29

Pranav Kumar Garg Vs Manoj Kumar Pingua IAS — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed by SAGRIKA SAGRIKA AGRAWAL AGRAWAL Date: 2025.09.04 15:05:40 +0530

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CONT No. 337 of 2025

¶6

1 - Pranav Kumar Garg S/o Ramesh Kumar Garg Aged About 52 Years Working As Pharmacist Grade-Ii, Central Jail Bilaspur, R/o. Central Jail Bilaspur, Ps Civil Lines, District- Bilaspur C.G.

¶7

2 - Bhagat Ram Satnami S/o Gaspati Satnami Aged About 47 Years Working As Pharmacist Grade-Ii, Central Jail Bilaspur, R/o. Central Jail Bilaspur, Ps Civil Lines, District- Bilaspur C.G.

¶8

3 - Smt. Shradha Singh W/o Nishant Singh Aged About 40 Years Working As Pharmacist Grade-Ii, Central Jail Bilaspur, R/o. Central Jail Bilaspur, Ps Civil Lines, District- Bilaspur C.G.

¶9

4 - Rupendra Tiwari S/o Shesh Narayan Tiwari Aged About 37 Years Working As Pharmacist Grade-Ii, District Jail Balodabazar, R/o. District Jail Balodabazar, Ps Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara C.G.

¶10

5 - Badri Vishal Patel S/o Ram Kushal Patel Aged About 41 Years Working As Pharmacist Grade-Ii, District Jail, Janjgir, R/o District Jail Janjgir, Ps Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa C.G.

¶11

... Petitioner(s)

¶12

versus

¶13

1 - Manoj Kumar Pingua Ias The Additional Chief Secretary-Home (Jail) Department Through The State Of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur C.G.

¶14

2 - Avinash Champawat Ias The Secretary-General Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur C.G.

¶15

3 - Himshikhar Gupta Ias The Secretary-Home (Jail) Department, State Of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur C.G.

¶16

4 - Himanshu Gupta Ips The Director General-Jail, Prision And Correctional Services Department, Sector-19, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur C.G.

¶17

¶18

5 - Amit Katariya Ias The Secretary-Pubic Health And Family Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur C.G.

¶19

... Respondent(s)

¶20

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Praveen Soni, Advocate on virtual mode
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Rakesh Jha, Advocate for Res. No. 1, 2, 3
	Ms. Pallavi Das, Advocate for Res. No. 4
	Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate for Res. No. 5

¶21

Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J

¶22

Order on Board

¶23

04.09.2025

¶24

1. Pursuant to the order dated 18.08.2025, Respondent No. 2, 3 and 5 have appeared in person before this Court.

¶25

2. At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents would submit that the benefit of the order under contempt has been granted to the petitioners and the order has been passed on 29.08.2025 granting the equal pay scale as per the Pharmacists Grade-II to the petitioners with effect from 01.04.2006 and within three months from today, the difference amount of arrears shall be paid to the petitioners to their bank accounts. They would also placed the copy of the order dated 29.08.2025, which is being taken on record.

¶26

3. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that though the specific period has been mentioned for compliance of the order contempt but the order has been complied with much later and since the order has been passed on 29.08.2025 and the assurance has been given by respondent authority that the difference of amount shall be paid to the petitioners within three months from today, at this juncture, the petitioners does not want to press the present contempt

¶27

¶28

petition further, however, liberty may be reserved to the petitioners to revive their prayer, if occasion so arises.

¶29

4. On due consideration, the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties, the present contempt petition is disposed of at this stage reserving the liberty to the petitioners to revive their prayer if

¶30

occasion so arises.

¶31

Sd/(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶32

sagrika

Pranav Kumar Garg v. Manoj Kumar Pingua IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pranav Kumar Garg v. Manoj Kumar Pingua IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohit Bhalla Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Suresh Prasad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/S Sai Info Services, Vs Shri Ajeet Vasant

Lalaram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Satyam Mahapatra Vs Union of India

Ashish Kumar Vs Niva Bupa Health Insurance Company