Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28148 (JHR)

ANIRBAN AICH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cont.(Cvl)/1181/2024 · 2025-05-02

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2025:JHHC:13264 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No. 1181 of 2024 1. Anirban Aich, aged about 36 years, son of Dilip Kumar Aich, Resident of E590 East Layout, Sonari, P.O. & P.S. Sonari, Jamshedpur, (Pin-831011), District-East Singhbhum. 2. Neeraj Kumar, aged about 38 years, son of Tirth Deo Singh, Resident of Village + P.O. Pirasin, P.S. Dobhi, District Gaya, (Pin-824201) 3. Manoj Prajapati, aged about 45 years, son of Kali Prajapati, Resident of Village Barhidih, P.O. & P.S. Barhi, District Hazaribagh (Pin-834002) 4. Shringi Sharan, aged about 38 years, son of Sanjeev Sharan, resident of HI-248, Harmu Housing Colony, P.O. & P.S. Argora, District Ranchi (Pin- 834002) 5. Sunil Kumar, aged about 47 years, son of late Amla Prasad, Resident of village Nayatola, Bankatawa, P.O. Mangalpur, Gudaria, P.S. Nautan, West Champaran (Bihar) Pin-845459 6. Krishna Kant Mahto, aged about 49 years, son of Lakhiram Mahto, Resident of village Pokhariya, P.O. Jamua, P.S. Chitra, District Deoghar. …… Petitioners Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Mr. Amitabh Kaushal, Secretary, Commercial Tax Department, Government of Jharkhand, having office at Project Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi …… Opp. Parties --------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners : Mr. Pratyush Shounikya, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anuj Burman, Advocate ………. 06/Dated: 02/05/2025 Learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that pursuant to writ court order the petitioners have been promoted and promotion order has been annexed with the show cause however the same is disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners on the ground that said promotion has not been given in the light of specific direction of the writ court order and it is required to be considered from the date junior to the petitioners has been given promotion. 2. Promotion order is there in view of that there is substantial compliance of writ court order. Accordingly, contempt proceeding is dropped and contempt petition is disposed of. Pending. I.A. if any stands disposed of. ( 2025:JHHC:13264 ) 3. If the petitioners are still aggrieved with, they may take recourse under the law. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Satyarthi/