Dismissed

Palturam Mahato v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC10 Mar 2021Cont.(Cvl)/831/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of an interlocutory application to ignore defects, considering reasons provided. Subsequently, the Court dismissed the contempt application for non-compliance of a prior writ order, finding that the authority complied by passing a decision on 12.07.2020, though the merit of that decision remains open for challenge.

What did the court decide?

Instant contempt case dismissed on satisfaction of compliance; petitioner left open to assail the substantive order before appropriate forum.

Palturam Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand — Contempt of Court | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cont. (Cvl.) Case No.831 of 2019

¶3

¶4

Palturam Mahato ……… Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad

¶8

Circle Officer, Dhanbad ………. Opp. Parties

¶9

¶10

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

¶11

--------For the Petitioner : Mr. Shristidhar Mahato, Adv. For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Shray Mishra, AC to GA-III

¶12

¶13

07/10.03.2021 The matter has been taken up through video conferencing. I.A.No.962 of 2020

¶14

The instant interlocutory application has been filed for ignoring the defect no.1 & defect no.3 which pertains to deletion of name of opposite party and filing of typed copy.

¶15

Considering the reason assigned therein, the defect no.1 & defect no.3 are hereby ignored.

¶16

Accordingly, I.A.No.962 of 2020 stands disposed of.

¶17

Cont. (Cvl.) Case No.831 of 2019

¶18

The instant contempt application is for willful and deliberate non-compliance of the order dated 10.04.2019 passed by the writ Court in W.P.(C) No.2940 of 2018.

¶19

Mr. Shristidhar Mahato, learned counsel is appearing on behalf of the petitioner as also Mr. Shray Mishra, learned AC to GA-III is present to represent the opposite parties.

¶20

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the opposite parties by referring to the show cause dated 26.08.2020 that the order passed by this Court has been complied with, therefore, the instant contempt case may be disposed of.

¶21

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone across the order passed by the writ Court in W.P.(C) No.2940 of 2018, whereby and whereunder, the direction to the effect upon the opposite

¶22

parties to take decision about claim of the writ petitioner within the stipulated period.

¶23

It is evident from the show cause, wherein, the order has been appended as annexure-A, by which, the decision has been taken in pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.2940 of 2018, the aforesaid order has been passed in Misc. Case No.30/2020-21 on 12.07.2020 by the Circle Officer, Putki.

¶24

In view thereof, this Court is of the view taking into consideration the nature of order, whereby and whereunder, the concerned opposite party has been directed to take decision upon the claim of the writ petitioner in accordance with Law which has been taken vide order dated 12.07.2020 and therefore, the order having been complied with in its letter and spirit, hence, there is no need to proceed further in the instant contempt case.

¶25

Accordingly, the instant contempt case is dismissed.

¶26

However, it is left open upon the petitioner to assail the order passed by the authority concerned before the appropriate Forum or before the Court of Law.

¶27

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶28

Rohit/-

Palturam Mahato v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Palturam Mahato v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjiv Kumar Vs Employees Provident Fund Organization through Its Regional Officer

Ankana Goswami Vs Transport

Chaya Bhandari Vs Collectariate

Mihir Kumar Singh Vs Rural Dev Dept

Excella Real Projects I Ltd. through Its Director Dulal Chandra Nandi Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Sunil Kumar Sinha Vs State of Jharkhand And Others