Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11767 (JHR)

BINOD KUMAR SINHA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cont.(Cvl)/942/2025 · 2025-08-08

Sri Ananda Sen

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:22707 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.942 of 2025 ----- 1.Binod Kumar Sinha, son of Arjun Prasad Sinha, resident of new Centre, Kustore, PO Alkusha, PS Kustore, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand 2.Chanda Devi, widow of late Sanjay Kumar Singh, resident of house no. 291, near Durga Mandir, Kusunda, PO and PS Kusunda, District Dhanbad 3.Binod Prasad Sinha, son of Late Sarju Prasad Lal, resident of near Hanumaan Mandir, Ganshadih No. 3, PO and PS Kusunda, District Dhanbad 4.Harsh Narayan Jha, son of Bali Ram Jha, resident of Khaira Punjabi Dhaura, PO Kenduadih, PS Kusunda, District Dhanbad 5.Kalyani Devi, wife of Harsh Narayan Jha, resident of near workshop, Khaira Punjabi Dhoura, PO Kenduadih, PS Kusunda, District Dhanbad 6.Jainandan Prasad, son of Yadunandan Prasad, resident of South Balihari 100 Unit, PO and PS Kusunda, District Dhanbad 7.Ramanand Paswan, son of Boudhu Paswan, resident of 54 Bastakola near Durga Mandir, PO Dhansar, PS Kenduadih cum Jagta, District Dhanbad 8.Nisha Devi, wife of Ramanand Paswan, resident of 54 Bastakola near Durga Mandir, PO Dhansar, PS Kenduadih cum Jagta, District Dhanbad … Petitioner(s). Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Shree Kumar Manoj, General Manager, Personal and Industrial Relation Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Koyala Bhawan, Dhanbad, PO Koyala Bhawan, PS Saraidhela, District Dhanbad … Opposite Party(s). CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Niranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rituraj, AC to SC VI For the OP : Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, Advocate …...... 02 /08.08.2025: Learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that the order dated 16.10.2024 passed in WP(S) No. 6019 of 2022 has been complied with by passing the reasoned order. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners admits that the reasoned order has been passed but submits that liberty may be given to challenge the same. 2025:JHHC:22707 3. Considering the submission of the parties, since the reasoned order has already been passed, this contempt application is dropped, however, liberty is granted to the petitioners to challenge the said reasoned order before the appropriate forum. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/