JITENDRA KUMAR JHA v. DR MANISH RANJAN THE SECRETARY DEPTT OF DRINKING WATER AND SANITATION
Cont.(Cvl)/1023/2023 · 2025-01-03
S N Pathak
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 30875 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 30875 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cont. Case (C). No. 1023 of 2023
---------- Jitendra Kumar Jha, son of Sri Pawan Kumar Jha, resident of Muhalla Gulmohar Park, Kaushal Apartment, Flat No. 301, Lower Burdhman Compound, P.O. & P.S. Lalpur, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand at present resident of Macon Vihar Apartment, 3rd Floor, Flat No. 301, Latma Road, near Shiv Mandir, New Latma, Hesag, Hatia, P.O. & P.S. Hatia, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand.
… … Petitioner - V E R S U S –
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. Dr. Manish Ranjan, Secretary, Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, State of Jharkhand, Govt. of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi.
3. Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Special Secretary, Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, State of Jharkhand, Govt. of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi.
4. Ms. Neha Arora, Director SBM(G), Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, State of Jharkhand, Govt. of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi
5. Mr. Chandan Kumar, Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman, District Drinking Water and Sanitation Committee, Ramgarh, P.O.+P.S. & Dist. Ramgarh.
6. Mr. Anil Prasad, Chief Engineer-cum-Executive Director, State Water and Sanitation Mission, Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Government of Jharkhand, Doranda Bazar, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi.
…….. Opp. Parties.
CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N.PATHAK
For the Petitioner : Mr. Dhirendra Kr. Deo, Advocate
Mr. Sumit Kumar, Advocate
For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Arun Kr. Dubey, AC to GP-III
---------- 07/ 03.01.2025 Heard the parties.
It has been very fairly submitted by learned counsel for the opposite parties that the order of this Court has already been complied with and in compliance of the Court’s order, payment has been made to the petitioner. As far as consequential benefits are concerned, the same is under active consideration.
2
Learned counsel for the petitioner does not object to the same.
In view of fair submission of learned counsel for the opposite parties, no contempt is made out against the opposite parties and hence, the same is dropped.
Resultantly, the instant contempt petition stands disposed of.
(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.) kunal