2025:JHHC:24938 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.609 of 2024 ...... Anjali Mishra, W/o Sri Indra Mohan Mishra, R/o Sarada Pally, Ashok Nagar, Vidyasagar Sarani, Raghunath Chak, P.O. & P.S. Bardhaman, Dist Bardhaman, West Bengal ------ Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Coal, Government of India 3.Amrit Lal Meena, posted as Secretary, Ministry of Coal, Government of India 4.Mr. Vijay Kumar Mishra, posted as Commissioner, Coal Mines Provident Fund Organisation, Police Line, P.O. & P.S. & Dist Dhanbad 5.Mr. Somen Chowdhury, posted at Regional Commissioner, Coal Mines Provident Fund Organisation, Asansol, Near BB College Road, Ushagram, P.O. & P.S. & Dist- Bardhaman, West Bengal ------ Opposite Party(s) …… CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate For the Opposite Party(s) : Mr. Nirupama, AC to Sr. S.C.-II For the UOI : Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Advocate For the CMPFO : Mr. Prashant Kr. Singh, Advocate …...... 04 / 22.08.2025: Heard, learned counsel for the parties. 2. The writ of certiorari was issued in writ petition being W.P.(S) No.3089 of 2021 vide order dated 13.12.2023, whereby the departmental proceeding was quashed. Paragraph Nos.9 and 10 of the impugned order reads as follows:- 9. Very recently, this Court exactly in a same and similar matter in W.P.(S) No. 4131 of 2011 (Ajay Kumar Sinha Vs. The Union of India & Ors.) decided on 02.11.2023 held that since the respondents have their own Regulation i.e. Coal Mines Provident Fund (Staff and Conditions of Service) Regulation, 1964, they are precluded from adopting a different Rules for initiation of departmental proceeding and thereafter, the impugned punishment order as well as appellate order has been quashed and set aside, with liberty to the respondents to proceed in view of their own Regulation. 10. In the facts of this case, the impugned punishment orders dated 10.01.2019 and 21.6.2021 are hereby quashed and set aside. However, liberty is reserved with the respondents to proceed against the petitioners in view of Coal Mines Provident Fund (Staff and Conditions of Service) Regulation, 1964, if they so wish. 3. By the impugned order, punishment order and the Appellate Order has already been quashed and there was no mandamus issued. Further, it is also not the case of the petitioner that the departmental proceeding is continuing inspite of quashment of the same, thus, no contempt is made out in this case. 4. Considering the aforesaid submissions, the instant contempt application is dropped. (ANANDA SEN, J.) R.S.