Binod Bhagat Vs State of Jharkhand

2026:JHHC:9676-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.1473 of 2025

Binod Bhagat, Aged about-38 Years, S/o- Sukhram Bhagat, R/oNear Krishi Bazar, Banhora, Ranka Toli, P.O.- Hehal, P.S. – Sukhdev Nagar, Pandra, Hehal, Ranchi, Jharkhand – 834005

¶5

… … … Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Jharkhand

¶8

Mrs. Alka Tiwari, W/o-D.K. Tiwari, Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, office situated at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. + P.S.- Dhurwa, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand,

¶9

Kripanand Jha, S/o not known to the Petitioner, Principal Secretary, Department of Welfare, Government of Jharkhand, office situated at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O.+ P.S.- Dhurwa, DistrictRanchi, Jharkhand

¶10

Mr. Kuldeep Choudhary, S/o not known to the Petitioner, Tribal Welfare Commissioner, Government of Jharkhand, Office situate at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O.+ P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand

¶11

… … …Opp. Parties

¶12

---------

¶13

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

¶14

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Binod Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Aman Kumar, AC to SC-VI

¶15

----------

¶16

Order No.08 / Dated 06^th April 2026

¶17

The instant contempt case has been filed against the opposite parties for alleged, deliberate and willful non-compliance of the order dated 30.04.2018 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W. P. (PIL) No. 4439 of 2017.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has submitted by referring to the paragraph- 3 of the said order that a sum of Rs. 9,37,76,000/- (Rs. Nine Crore Thirty Seven Lacs Seventy Six Thousand) was available for the particular scheme, i.e., the Income Generating Scheme under the Integrated Tribal Development Plan

¶19

1

¶20

2026:JHHC:9676-DB

¶21

(I.T.D.P), out of which, Rs. 8,70,00,000/- (Rs. Eight Crore Seventy Lacs) has already been utilized.

¶22

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties has submitted that the out of rest of the amount, which was directed to be utilized, i.e., to the tune of Rs. 67,76,000/- (Rs.Sixty Seven Lacs Seventy Six Thousand), has also been utilized as the reference given in the show cause dated 03.02.2026 particularly at paragraph-8, 9, 10 and 11 thereof.

¶23

The entire amount, which has been referred after taking into consideration by this Court, vide order dated 30.04.2018 passed in W. P. (PIL) No. 4439 of 2017 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, which is subject matter of the present contempt case, as per the opposite parties, has already been utilized.

¶24

Mr. Binod Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the particular scheme since is for the purpose of welfare of the marginalized class, and as such, the fund is to be released and utilized on the basis of the financial year regularly. But for the rest of the financial year, the amount is not been regularly released.

¶25

The said contention has seriously been objected by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State by submitting that the question of release of further amount other than the subject matter of the contempt case which was for the financial year 2008 and 2009 cannot be within the scope of the contempt case.

¶26

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, has sought leave of this Court not to purse and withdraw this contempt case with liberty to avail the remedy available for redressal of the grievances.

¶27