Disposed¶29

Jharkhand State Civil Courts Stenographers Associations through Its Secretary Nagendra Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 Nov 2025Cont.(Cvl)/15/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi — Contempt Case (Civil) No. 15 of 2022, disposed of on 4th November, 2025 by Deepak Roshan, J. Keywords: contempt; compliance of order dated 23.08.2021 in W.P(S) No. 3479 of 2011; pay scale parity; Stenographer of Muffasil Office vs Stenographer of Jharkhand State Civil Court; State Government resolution meeting dated 03.03.2008; supplementary showcause/compliance report dated 02.04.2025; Circular no. 1386 dated 10.04.2007; fixation of pay; no contempt made out.

What did the court decide?

Contempt application disposed of, no contempt being made out; petitioner left at liberty to raise issues regarding calculation of their amount in view of circular no. 1386 dated 10.04.2007, if fixation has not been done. ¶29

Jharkhand State Civil Courts Stenographers Associations through Its Secretary Nagendra Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2025:JHHC:33703

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Contempt Case (Civil) No. 15 of 2022

¶3

¶4

Jharkhand State Civil Courts Stenographers Associations, through its Secretary Nagendra Kumar, aged about 51 years, son of Siddeshwar Prasad Singh, resident of 322 B, New Colony Tungri, Chaibasa, P.O. & P.S. Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum. ...Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

Shri Ajay Kumar Singh, Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, State of Jharkhand having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi

¶8

Shri L. Khiyangte, Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, State of Jharkhand having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶9

Shri Nalin Kumar, Secretary-cum-Legal Remembrancer, Department of Law (Judicial), State of Jharkhand having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi

¶10

High Court of Jharkhand through Registrar General, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi (Jharkhand)

¶11

...Opposite parties

¶12

¶13

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶14

¶15

For the Petitioner(s) : M/s. Rishikesh Giri, Rishav Kumar, Advocates For the O.P-State : Mr. Amit Kumar, S.C(Mines)-II Ms. Shilpi, A.C to S.C(Mines)-II For the O.P. No. 5 : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate ---

¶16

06/04.11.2025 This contempt application has been preferred for

¶17

non-compliance of the order dated 23.08.2021 passed by this Court in W.P(S) No. 3479 of 2011.

¶18

2. During the midst of proceeding and pursuant to several orders passed by this Court, a supplementary showcause/compliance report was filed on 02.04.2025, wherein a Chart has been given in Page nos. 11 to 15 with regard to scale of Stenographer of Muffasil Office in comparison to Stenographer of Jharkhand State Civil Court.

¶19

¶20

2025:JHHC:33703

¶21

3. From bare perusal of the Chart, which is indicated in the said show-cause, it is evident that now pay scale of the Stenographer of Muffasil Office and pay scale of Stenographer of Jharkhand State Civil Court are one and the same.

¶22

4. Now, the grievance of the Petitioner is that though the Stenographer of Muffasil Office were getting higher pay scale initially and the scale of members of Petitioner-Association i.e. Stenographer of Jharkhand State Civil Court has been made at par now; therefore, there is disparity.

¶23

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that though from the Chart, it appears that it is same and similar, but the fact remains that the Government has taken note of Notification/meeting dated 03.03.2008.

¶24

He further submits that the fixation should have been done in view of Circular no. 1386 dated 10.04.2007, but the same has not been done.

¶25

6. After going through the order for which compliance is required, it appears that this Court in Para-5 of its order on the basis of Para-13 of counter affidavit filed by the respondent no. 5 in the writ application, observed that the State Government had already taken a decision to provide the same scale to Stenographer of Civil Court as notified by the State Government regarding Stenographer of Muffasil and on the basis of that averments made in the counter affidavit filed

¶26

¶27

2025:JHHC:33703

¶28

by the respondent no. 5, this Court had directed the Respondents that if the prayer of the Petitioner has not been redressed till date; then the same shall be done in view of resolution of the State Government taken in its meeting dated 03.03.2008.

¶29

7. As stated hereinabove, from bare perusal of the Chart, which is indicated in the supplementary showcause/compliance report dated 02.04.2025, this Court is having no hesitation in holding that now pay scale of the Stenographer of Muffasil Office and pay scale of Stenographer of Jharkhand State Civil Court are one and the same; as such, so far as this proceeding is concerned; now no contempt is made out.

¶30

However, the petitioner would be at liberty to raise their issues with regard to calculation of their amount in view of the circular no. 1386 dated 10.04.2007, if the same has not been done.

¶31

8. Accordingly, the contempt application stands

¶32

disposed of.

¶33

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶34

4^th November, 2025 Jk Uploaded on 12/11 /2025

¶35

Jharkhand State Civil Courts Stenographers Associations through Its Secretary Nagendra Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jharkhand State Civil Courts Stenographers Associations through Its Secretary Nagendra Kumar 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

Baba Baidyanath Medical Trust, through Its Authorized Representative Pankaj Kumar, Vs State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Health

Baba Baidyanath Medical Trust, through Its Authorized Representative Pankaj Kumar, Vs State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Health

Sunil Kumar Sultania Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary Road Construction Department

Ram Chandra Goyenka Charitable Trust through Its Authorized Signatory Krishna Mohan Chowbey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited, through Santoush Kadam, Vs Jay Prakash Singh

Ranjit Gope Vs the State of Jharkhand