Disposed¶17

Mohan Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC6 Feb 2026Cont.(Cvl)/547/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court contempt case (Cont. Case (Civil) No.547 of 2025, Ananda Sen, J., 06.02.2026) concerning non-compliance of order dated 12.06.2024 in W.P.(S) No.3146 of 2023. Petitioner Mohan Sharma alleged non-payment of ACP monetary benefit w.e.f. 01.03.2007 and resultant miscalculation of pensionary benefits; State contended all admitted benefits paid. Result: no contempt made out, proceeding dropped, liberty reserved to claim outstanding amount and consequential benefits from Secretary, Department of Forest, Environment and Climate Change.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceeding dropped with no contempt found; petitioner granted liberty to approach opposite party No.2 for payment of the claimed ACP dues and consequential benefits, or receipt of payment details if already made. ¶17

Mohan Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether any contempt is made out for non-compliance of the order dated 12.06.2024 passed in W.P.(S) No.3146 of 2023, given that most of the benefits have been extended to the petitioner. +1 more

¶15

Court's answer

Since most of the benefits have been extended to the petitioner, no contempt is made out.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The contempt proceeding is dropped.

¶17

Key takeaways

Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach opposite party No.2 (Secretary, Department of Forest, Environment and Climate Change, Government of Jharkhand) claiming the amount which, according to the petitioner, is due.ratio¶18
If the claimed amount is at all due, opposite party No.2 will ensure payment of the same along with consequential benefits; if it has already been paid, the details showing the payment are to be handed over to the petitioner.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Jharkhand High Court (Ranchi) — Cont. Case (Civil) No.547 of 2025 (Ananda Sen, J.; decided 06.02.2026): Contempt petition by Mohan Sharma for non-compliance of order dated 12.06.2024 in W.P.(S) No.3146 of 2023. State submitted all admitted benefits were paid; petitioner asserted that all benefits except the monetary benefit of ACP w.e.f. 01.03.2007 had been paid, and that non-payment of the revised scale caused wrong calculation of his pensionary benefits. Court held that since most benefits had been extended, no contempt is made out, and dropped the proceeding. Liberty reserved to petitioner to approach the Secretary, Department of Forest, Environment and Climate Change (O.P. No.2) claiming any amount still due; if due, O.P. No.2 to ensure payment with consequential benefits; if already paid, payment details to be handed over to the petitioner.

¶1

2026:JHHC:3218

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.547 of 2025

¶3

Mohan Sharma, son of Late Bachchu Sharma, resident of Ashiyana Garden, P.O. & P.S. Sonari, Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur. … … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand.

¶6

Sri Aboobacker Siddique, presently holding the post of Secretary, Department of Forest, Environment and Climate Change, having office at Nepal House, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi.

¶7

… … Opposite Parties

¶8

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶9

------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Ranjan, Advocate For the O.P. (s) : Mr. Rahul Saboo, GP-II Mr. Gaurang Jajodia, AC to GP-II

¶10

05/ 06.02.2026

¶11

Heard the parties.

¶12

2. This Contempt Petition has been preferred by the petitioner against non-compliance of order dated 12.06.2024 passed in W.P.(S) No.3146 of 2023.

¶13

3. Learned counsel representing the opposite party – State submits that all the admitted benefits have been paid.

¶14

4. Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that all the other benefits except the monetary benefit of the ACP w.e.f. 01.03.2007 have been paid. He submits that due to nonpayment of the revised scale, the pensionary benefits of the petitioner have been wrongly calculated.

¶15

5. Considering the aforesaid submission, I am of the opinion that since most of the benefits have been extended to the petitioner, no contempt is made out.

¶16

2026:JHHC:3218

¶17

6. Accordingly, this Contempt Proceeding is dropped .

¶18

7. However, liberty is reserved with the petitioner to approach opposite party No.2 - Secretary, Department of Forest, Environment and Climate Change, Government of Jharkhand, claiming the amount which according to the petitioner is due.

¶19

8. If the aforesaid amount is at all due, the opposite party No.2 will ensure payment of the same and will also give the consequential benefits.

¶20

9. If the said amount has already been paid, the details thereof showing the payment, should be handed over to the petitioner.

¶21

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶22

06^th February, 2026 Prashant. Cp-2

¶23

Uploaded on 10.02.2026

Mohan Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Sharma 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

Rashmi Srivastava Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manju Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ram Nagina Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand Thro Its Secretary, Department of Water Resoruces

Sahdeo Hansda Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro

Asha Sinha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mohan Rajak Vs the State of Jharkhand