Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26984 (JHR)

KRISHNA KINKAR MONDAL v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cont.(Cvl)/149/2025 · 2025-03-11

Rajesh Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.149 of 2025 ---- Krishna Kinkar Mondal aged about 52 years son of Choudhary Pd. Mondal resident of village – Jiyaljori, P.O.-Kasitanr, P.S.-Karmatanr, District-Jamtara, Jharkhand. …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Shri Shashi Prakash Singh, s/o not known to the petitioner, The Director, Primary Education, School Education and Literacy Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, P.O.+P.S.- Dhurwa, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. Sri. Ananya Mittal, s/o not known to the petitioner, the Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, P.O.+P.S.- Sakchi, District-East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur, Jharkhand. 4. Sri Ashish Kumar Pandey, S/o not known to the petitioner, The District Superintendent of Education, East Singhbhum, State Mile Road, Bistupur, P.O.+P.S.- Bistupur, District-East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur, Jharkhand. …. …. Opposite Party(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Petitioner : Mr. Baleshwar Yadav, Adv. For the Opposite Party(s) : Mr. Devesh Krishna, S.C. Mines-III ---- 03/Dated: 11th March, 2025 1. The present contempt case has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of an appropriate proceeding under the Contempt of Courts Act against the respondents/opposite parties for their wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court vide order dated 26.06.2024 in W.P.(S) No.3425 of 2024. 2. It appears that show cause has been filed on behalf of the opposite parties wherein it has been stated that he has been allowed to participate in the counselling process and further more meritorious candidates have been appointed. But this fact has been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner submitting that even less meritorious candidates than this petitioner have been appointed and as such this is a fresh cause of action. 3. In view of the above discussion, present contempt petition is hereby disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to workout his remedy in accordance with law. 4. The contempt proceeding is hereby closed. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Amar/- Uploaded