Dismissed

Manish Kumar Pandey v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC17 Mar 2023Cont.(Cvl)/8/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand disposed of a contempt application against various respondents for wilful disobedience of an earlier order. The Court dropped the proceedings against the respondents, including the Rent Controller, noting that the underlying eviction case had been concluded via compromise and no further action was necessary.

What did the court decide?

The contempt proceeding was dropped and the application disposed of without further proceeding against the opposite parties.

Manish Kumar Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand — Contempt of Court | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cont. Case (Civil) No. 08 of 2022 Manish Kumar Pandey ….. Petitioner

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand

¶5

Mr. Varun Ranjan, Deputy Commissioner, Pakur

¶6

Hariwansh Pandit, Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Rent Controller, Pakur

¶7

Mr. Pankaj Kumar Shaw, Secretary, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi

¶8

….. Opposite Parties

¶9

----- CORAM

¶10

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶11

----For the Petitioner: Mr. Jitendra Tripathi For O.P.No.4: Mr. Sachin Kumar -----

¶12

09/17.03.2023 The present contempt application has been filed against the opposite parties for wilful disobedience and non-compliance of the order dated 01.03.2021 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 3894/2020.

¶13

Pursuant to the order dated 17.02.2023, the O.P.No.4 is physically

¶14

present before this Court.

¶15

Mr. Sachin Kumar, learned counsel for the O.P.No.4, submits that a show cause affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the said opposite party seeking unconditional apology from this Court for staying the proceeding of Title Eviction (J.B.C) Case No. 05/2016-17 despite specific direction of this Court to expedite the hearing of the said case and to dispose of the same after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as Md. Rezamuddin @ Nazamuddin (the tenant of the premises). It is further submitted that the proceeding of the said case was inadvertently stayed by the O.P.No.4 and he had no intention to violate the aforesaid order of this Court. The O.P.No.4 will not commit such mistake in future and will always be prompt in complying the orders of this Court.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and for the reasons stated in the show cause affidavit filed on behalf of the O.P.No.4, this Court does not intend to proceed further against the O.P.No.4.

¶17

Since Title Eviction (J.B.C) Case No. 05/2016-17 has already been concluded on 14.02.2023 in terms with the comprise between the petitioner and his tenant, there is no need to further proceed with the present matter.

¶18

The contempt proceeding as against the opposite parties including the

¶19

O.P.No.4 is dropped.

¶20

The present contempt application stands disposed of.

¶21

(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)

¶22

Satish/-

Manish Kumar Pandey v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Kumar Pandey 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

Ajay Sinha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Runti Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mantu Rani Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Subhash Deo Soni Vs State of Jharkhand

Ms Shailendra Kumar Engineer and Contractor through Its Proprietor Shailendra Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand

Parshuram Mehta Vs the State of Jharkhand