Dhaneshwari Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Dhaneshwari Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the contempt proceeding was dropped, with liberty left to the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordance with law if aggrieved by the reasoned order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Respondents/Contemnors committed wilful and deliberate disobedience and violation of the Court's order/direction contained in the order dt. 07.06.2022 passed in W.P.(S) No. 1660 of 2020, warranting initiation of a contempt proceeding.

Court's answer

Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsels, the Court is not inclined to proceed any further in this contempt proceeding.

Ratio / Principle

The contempt proceeding is hereby dropped.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner is aggrieved by the reasoned order, he may take appropriate steps in accordance with law.obiter¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt proceeding (Cont. Case (Civil) No. 178 of 2023, High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi; decided 20.08.2024 by Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary) instituted by Dhaneshwari Devi and Arti Devi against the State of Jharkhand and Sri Harsh Nath Mishra (Director (Personnel), Central Coalfields Ltd.), seeking initiation of a contempt proceeding for wilful and deliberate disobedience of the Court's order dt. 07.06.2022 in W.P.(S) No. 1660 of 2020, which had directed Respondent No.-2 to take a fresh decision in accordance with law by a speaking order within four weeks, to hear the writ petitioners and ascertain that petitioner No.-2 was dependent on her father's income at the time of his death and at present lacks sufficient means to run her household irrespective of whether she is married or not, with the representation to be filed within two months and the reasoned order communicated by speed post. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that, though a reasoned order has been passed, the order of the Court has not been followed in letter and spirit; counsel for the opposite party submitted that every aspect of the matter was taken care of by the committee and a reasoned order passed upon scrutiny of the records. Considering these submissions, the Court held itself not inclined to proceed further and dropped the contempt proceeding, advising that a petitioner aggrieved by the reasoned order may take appropriate steps in accordance with law.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cont. Case (Civil) No. 178 of 2023

Dhaneshwari Devi, aged about 55 years, wife of Late Bisheswar Saw, resident of at - Moyal Bazar, P.O. Chittarpur, P.S. Rajrappa District Ramgarh, Jharkhand.,

Arti Devi, aged about 26 years, daughter of Late Bisheswar Saw, resident of at - Moyal Bazar, P.O. - Chittarpur, P.S. – Rajrappa, District – Ramgarh, Jharkhand … … Petitioners

Versus

State of Jharkhand

Sri Harsh Nath Mishra, fathers name not known to the petitioner, presently posted as Director (Personnel), Central Coalfields Ltd. having its office at Darbhanga House, Ranchi, P.O. - G.P.O., P.S. - Kotwali, District - Ranchi. … … Opp. Parties

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

--For the Petitioners : Mr. Uday Prakash, Advocate For the CCL : Mrs. Alpana Verma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Amitesh Kr. Geasen, AC to AAG IA ---

19 /20.08.2024 The learned counsels for the parties are present.

2. This Contempt Civil has been filed for the following relief:

“That this instant contempt application is being filed by the petitioner for initiating a contempt proceeding against the Respondents/Contemnors for their wilful and deliberate disobedience and violation of the order/direction of this Hon'ble Court as contained in order dt. 07.06.2022 (Annexure-1) passed by Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary in W.P.(S) No. 1660 of 2020, whereby and whereunder, Her Lordship was pleased to pass direction to Respondents/Contemnors in particular to the Respondent No.-2 to take a fresh decision in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with a detailed representation and also a copy of the writ records and that, the representation should be filed by the petitioners within a period of two months from today and that, the reasoned order be communicated to the petitioners by speed post at the address to be provided by them in the representation itself and it was made clear that the authority taking the decision should ascertain, upon giving the writ petitioners an opportunity of being heard, that petitioner No.-2 was dependent on her father's income at the time of his death and at present the petitioner no.2 does not have sufficient means to run her household irrespective of the fact that as to whether she is married or not.”

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though a reasoned order has been passed, but the order of this Court has not been followed in letter and spirit.

4. The learned counsel for the opposite party submits that every aspect of the matter has been taken care by the committee and thereafter upon scrutiny of the records, the reasoned order has been passed.

5. Considering the aforesaid submissions, this Court is not inclined to proceed any further in this contempt proceeding.

6. Accordingly, the contempt proceeding is hereby dropped.

7. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the reasoned order, he may take appropriate steps in accordance with law.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

Saurav

2