Kameshwar Prasad Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC10 Jan 2024Cont.(Cvl)/187/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; Cont. Case (Civil) No.187 of 2021; Rajesh Shankar, J.; order dated 10.01.2024; contempt proceeding against District Education Officer, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur for violation of order dated 01.12.2020 in W.P.(S) No.3564 of 2019; compliance office order memo no.921 dated 29.06.2022; selection pay scale (senior selection grade); notional benefit without financial benefit to petitioner nos.1 and 4; contempt proceeding dropped; contempt case disposed; liberty to petitioners to challenge office order under law.

What did the court decide?

None to petitioners; the contempt proceeding against opposite party no.2 was dropped and the contempt case disposed of, with liberty reserved to the petitioners to challenge the office order dated 29.06.2022. ¶¶20

Kameshwar Prasad Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.187 of 2021

¶2

¶3

Kameshwar Prasad Singh

¶4

Vinay Kumar Singh

¶5

Jagdish Tiwary

¶6

Dr. Sheobhajan Ram Yadav

¶7

Kapeshwar Prasad Madhup .......... Petitioners. -Versus-

¶8

The State of Jharkhand

¶9

Sachidanand Divendu Tigga, District Education Officer, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur.

¶10

.......... Opp. Parties.

¶11

¶12

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶13

----For the Petitioners : Dr. S. K. Chaturvedi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arun Kr. Dubey, A.C. to G.P.III ----- Order No.11 Date: 10.01.2024

¶14

The present contempt case has been filed for initiating a contempt proceeding against the opposite party no.2 for his wilful and deliberate violation of the order dated 1^st December, 2020 passed in W.P.(S) No.3564 of 2019.

¶15

Mr. Arun Kumar Dubey, learned A.C. to G.P.III appearing on behalf of the opposite party no.2 refers to the office order as contained in memo no.921 dated 29^th June, 2022 (Annexure-A to the show cause affidavit dated 20^th April, 2023) and submits that by the said order, notional benefit of selection pay scale (senior selection grade) has been granted to the petitioner nos.1 and 4, however, no financial benefit has been given to them. So far as rest of the petitioners are concerned, they have not been found entitled for grant of selection pay scale (senior selection grade). It is, thus, submitted by the counsel for the opposite parties that the aforesaid order of this Court has been complied by the opposite party no.2.

¶16

-2-

¶17

As against this, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the aforesaid order passed by the opposite party no.2 is not in accordance with law.

¶18

Be that as it may.

¶19

Since the opposite party no.2 has passed the reasoned order, as contained in memo no.921 dated 29^th June, 2022, there is no reason to proceed further in the matter. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite party no.2 is hereby dropped.

¶20

The present contempt case stands disposed of.

¶21

The petitioners are, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse against the aforesaid order passed by the opposite party no.2 as permissible under law.

¶22

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶23

Sanjay/

Kameshwar Prasad Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kameshwar Prasad Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

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

Praveen Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kumari Neelam Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand

MD Sayuz Anzari Vs State of Jharkhand

Ramnath Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dr Ravindra Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand

Nitu Srivastava Vs the State of Jharkhand