The High Court of Jharkhand, in these contempt proceedings, dropped the matter after the respondents submitted that they had complied with the earlier order dated 24.07.2019 by rejecting the petitioners' claims as already settled.
Contempt proceedings against opposite party Nos. 2 to 4 are dropped.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cont. Case (Civil) No. 84 of 2020
---
…. … Opp. Parties
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
For the Petitioners : None For the O.P. No. 1 : Mr. Mukul Kumar Singh, AC to G.P.-III For the O.P. Nos. 2 to 5 : Mr. Shivam Utkarsh Sahay, A.C. to Mr. A.K. Das, Advocate
c Order No. 11
Dated: 25.01.2024
The present contempt petition has been filed for initiation of contempt proceeding as against the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 alleging willful violation of order dated 24.07.2019 passed in W.P.(S) No. 5384 of 2017.
2. Mr. Shivam Utkarsh Sahay, A.C. to Mr. A.K. Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 to 4, refers to reasoned order as contained in Ref. No. 102 dated 27.04.2020 (Annexure-B to the show cause affidavit dated 03.01.2024 filed on behalf of the said opposite parties) passed by the Project Officer, Rajrappa Project, Central Coalfields Limited, Ramgarh and submits that the petitioners’ claim pursuant to aforesaid order of this Court has been considered and the same has been rejected on the ground that all admissible dues have already been paid to them. It is thus submitted that the order
2
dated 24.07.2019 passed in W.P.(S) No. 5384 of 2017 has been complied.
3. Considering the said submission, there is no need to further proceed in the present contempt matter.
4. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite party
nos. 2 to 4 is hereby dropped.
5. The contempt petition is accordingly disposed of.
6. However, if the petitioners have any grievance, they may
take appropriate recourse as permissible under law against the reasoned order as contained in Ref. No. 102 dated 27.04.2020 passed by the Project Officer, Rajrappa Project, Central Coalfields
Limited, Ramgarh.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Ritesh/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether contempt proceedings against respondents 2 to 4 for alleged violation of an earlier court order should be maintained given their submission of compliance.
Janeshwar Mahto
Yamuna Prasad Burman
Amrit Kumar
The State of Jharkhand
Sri Gopal Singh
Sri Gunjan Kumar Sinha
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court