The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.13 of 2018 With Cont. Case (Civil) No.946 of 2017 With Cont. Case (Civil) No.950 of 2017 With Cont. Case (Civil) No.14 of 2018 ----- Tetri Oraon .......... Petitioner. [In Cont. Case (Civil) No.13/2018] 1. Bhadeshwar Lakra 2. Shashi Kumar Khalko 3. Ram Kishore Nath Tandon 4. Krishnamani Tirkey 5. Pramod Kumar Mehra 6. Obaidullah Zahir 7. Bimal Tirkey 8. Md. Rafique 9. Harmohan Napit 10. Mahadeo Oraon 11. Machhinder Singh 12. Jageshwar Mahto 13. Janak Ram 14. Mithilesh Nath Mishra 15. Chandraketu Prasad Singh 1. Panchu Bairaik 2. Surendra Khalkho 3. Bijeshwar Kumar Sahu 4. Abul Wafa 5. Suresh Kumar Parmanik 6. Jagdish Oraon 7. Surendra Oraon 8. Vijay Ram 9. Poonam Varma 10. Bishu Oraon 11. Narayan Singh 12. Vugu Oraon 13. Etwa Oraon 14. Tetra Oraon 15. Bhim Bhagat 16. Bajrang Verma Prabha Devi .......... Petitioners. [In Cont. Case (Civil) No.946/2017] .......... Petitioners. [In Cont. Case (Civil) No.950/2017] .......... Petitioner. [In Cont. Case (Civil) No.14/2018] -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Abu Imran, Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 3. K. K. Khandalwal, Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi. .......... Respondents. [In Cont. Case (Civil) Nos.13/2018 & 950/2017] 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Abu Imran, Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 3. K. K. Khandalwal, Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 4. Ramesh Kumar Pandey, Vice Chancellor, Ranchi University, Ranchi. 5. Amar Kumar Choudhry, Registrar, Ranchi University, Ranchi. .......... Respondents. [In Cont. Case (Civil) Nos.946/2017 & 14/2018] -----
Legal Reasoning
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner(s): : For the State Mr. Shreshth Gautam, Advocate Mr. Ashutosh Anand, A.A.G.III ----- Order No.29 Date: 14.06.2024 1. The present contempt cases have been filed for initiating contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for their wilful and deliberate violation of the order dated 9th August, 2017 passed in W.P.(S) No.1956 of 2015 along with W.P.(S) No.1957 of 2015. 2. The aforesaid contempt cases were earlier taken up on 26th April, 2024 and on the said date following order was passed:- 1. “The present contempt cases were earlier taken up on 22nd March, 2024 and on the said date, learned AAG-III appearing on behalf of the opposite parties was allowed four weeks’ time to bring on record fresh reasoned order keeping in view the observation made in the order dated 29th September, 2023 passed in the present batch of contempt cases and to file compliance affidavit. 2. Today I.A. Nos.4288, 4289, 4287 & 4284 of 2024 have been filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2 in respective present contempt cases. -2- 3. Mr. Ashutosh Anand, learned AAG-III refers to paragraphs nos.3, 4 & 5 of the said interlocutory applications and prays for twelve weeks more time to file compliance affidavit. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering that the order dated 9th August, 2017 passed in W.P.(S) Nos.1956 & 1957 of 2015 has not been compiled by the opposite parties for more than six and half years, the opposite party no.2 is granted six weeks more time by way of last indulgence to file compliance affidavit failing which an appropriate order against the said opposite party shall be passed on the next date fixed. 5. I.A. Nos.4288, 4289, 4287 & 4284 of 2024 are,
Decision
accordingly, disposed of. 6. Put up these cases under the same heading on 14th June, 2024.” 3. Mr. Ashutosh Anand, learned A.A.G.III, refers to paragraph nos.5 & 6 of the supplementary show cause affidavit dated 14th June, 2024 filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2, which read as under:- “5. That the answering opposite party most humbly and respectfully submits that the deponent has joined as the Director, Higher Education, Govt. of Jharkhand in the month of February 2024 and after his joining, when the order dated 15.03.2024 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Civil) Diary No.52130/2023 as well as orders of this Hon’ble Court passed in the present case was brought in his knowledge, the answering opposite party examined the issue involve in the present litigation and found that the issue involve in the present case has got a chequered history of litigations resulting in passing of several reasoned orders with varied stand by the authorities/predecessors of the deponent in compliance of the orders of this Hon’ble Court passed in the instant contempt application. In such circumstances, in view of the direction of this Hon’ble Court passed in the present Contempt case vide order dated 29.09.2023 as well as of 26.04.2024, the case of the petitioner was exhaustively examined by the departmental authorities afresh and upon detail examination of facts it was found that the claim of the petitioner to the extent that his case is same as of the petitioners of W.P.(S) No.3260 of 2016 is not proved from records. As such, vide Memo No.870 dated -3- 11.06.2024 a fresh and detail well reasoned order has been issued under the signature of the deponent, i.e. the Director, Higher Education, Government of Jharkhand. 6. That the answering opposite party most humbly and respectfully submits that in peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case as mentioned in the reasoned order the claim for grant of approval of pay fixation in 5th and 6th revised pay scale to the petition is not justified and thus, rejected.” 4. It is, thus, submitted that the order dated 9th August, 2017 passed in the said writ petitions has now been complied. 5. As against this, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the reasoned orders as contained in memo nos.870, 868, 869 & 867, all dated 11th June, 2024 passed by the opposite party no.2 cannot be said to be in true compliance of the order dated 9th August, 2017 passed in W.P.(S) Nos.1956 & 1957 of 2015, as the case of the petitioners is similarly situated to the petitioners of W.P.(S) No.3260 of 2016. Despite the said fact, the petitioners’ claim for grant of 5th and 6th pay revision commission has illegally been rejected. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the petitioners have failed to make out a case of deliberate and intentional violation of the order dated 9th August, 2017 passed in the said writ petitions against the opposite party no.2. Hence, there is no need to further proceed in the matter. 7. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite parties is hereby dropped. 8. The present contempt cases stand disposed of. -4- 9. The petitioners are, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse against the reasoned orders dated 11th June, 2024 passed by the opposite party no.2 as permissible under law. Sanjay/vs (Rajesh Shankar, J.) -5-