Baldeo Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors. — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Baldeo Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors. — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt proceeding against the opposite parties dropped; the present contempt application stands disposed of; petitioner granted liberty to take appropriate recourse against memo No. 4979 dated 12.09.2023 as permissible under law; I.A. No. 2991/2023 consequently stands disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether a case of contempt is made out against the opposite parties for wilful disobedience and non-compliance of the judgment dated 02.03.2017 passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 4885/2004.

Ratio / Principle

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the order as contained in memo No. 4979 dated 12.09.2023, no case of contempt is made out against the opposite parties.

Key takeaways

The contempt proceeding as against the opposite parties is dropped.ratio¶12
The petitioner is at liberty to take appropriate recourse against the order as contained in memo No. 4979 dated 12.09.2023 as permissible under law.ratio¶14
Consequent to the disposal of the contempt application, I.A. No. 2991/2023 also stands disposed of.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (docket 13/03.01.2024), Rajesh Shankar, J. — Contempt proceeding DROPPED. Baldeo Ram's contempt application (Cont. Case (Civil) No. 547 of 2017) alleged wilful disobedience and non-compliance by the opposite parties of the judgment dated 02.03.2017 passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 4885/2004. Counsel relied on the Division Bench order dated 04.07.2022 in L.P.A. No. 491/2017 (Annexure-I.A/1 to I.A. No. 2991/2023), which dismissed the appeal and modified the 2017 Single-Judge judgment — its quoted paragraph 17 directed the competent authority to afford sufficient opportunity to file the written defence, to examine whether the departmental proceeding suffered the pleaded irregularity, and required, in matters of remand, a conscious decision by the departmental Secretary on the materials before preferring any appeal. Learned A.A.G-IV, through paragraphs 4 & 5 of the supplementary show cause affidavit dated 13.10.2023 filed on behalf of O.P.No.2, showed that a fresh government decision had been taken, conveyed by memo No. 4979 dated 12.09.2023 (Annexure-C) under the signature of the Under Secretary to the Government, Department of Water Resources. Considering that order, the learned Single Judge held that no case of contempt was made out against the opposite parties, dropped the contempt proceeding and disposed of the application, leaving the petitioner at liberty to take appropriate recourse against memo No. 4979 dated 12.09.2023 as permissible under law; I.A. No. 2991/2023 consequently stood disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cont. Case (Civil) No. 547 of 2017 Baldeo Ram ….. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Others ….. Opposite Parties ----- CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----For the Petitioner: Mr. Saurabh Shekhar For the State: Mr. Ashok Kumar, A.A.G-IV For O.P.No.4: Dr. Ashok Kr. Singh -----

13/03.01.2024 The present contempt application has been filed against the opposite parties for wilful disobedience and non-compliance of the judgment dated 02.03.2017 passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 4885/2004.

Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the order dated 04.07.2022 passed by learned Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 491/2017 (Annexure-I.A/1 to I.A. No. 2991/2023) and submits that the judgment dated 02.03.2017 passed by learned Single judge in W.P.(S) No. 4885/2004 has been modified in the following manner:

‘’17. For the aforesaid reasons, we find no merit in this Letters Patent Appeal and, accordingly, L.P.A. No. 491/2017 is dismissed. The competent authority shall afford sufficient opportunity to the respondent No.1 to file his written defence and would examine whether the departmental proceeding conducted against him suffered from any irregularity as pleaded by the respondent No.1. We would observe that in the matters of remand, the departmental Secretary should take a conscious decision on examination of the materials on record, before a decision in such matters to prefer any appeal is taken.’’

Learned A.A.G-IV refers to paragraphs 4 & 5 of the supplementary show cause affidavit dated 13.10.2023 filed on behalf of the O.P.No.2 and submits that subsequent to the aforesaid order passed in L.P.A. No. 491/2017, the government has taken a fresh decision as contained in memo No. 4979 dated 12.09.2023 (Annexure-C to the said show cause affidavit) issued under the signature of the Under Secretary to the Government, Department of Water

Resources. It is thus submitted that no case of contempt is made out against the O.P.No.2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while passing the aforesaid order, the petitioner’s defence has not properly been considered.

Be that as it may.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the order as contained in memo No. 4979 dated 12.09.2023, I am of the view that no case

of contempt is made out against the opposite parties.

The contempt proceeding as against the opposite parties is dropped.

The present contempt application stands disposed of.

The petitioner is however at liberty to take appropriate recourse against the order as contained in memo No. 4979 dated 12.09.2023 as permissible under law.

Consequently, I.A. No. 2991/2023 also stands disposed of.

(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)

Satish/-