2025:JHHC:22950-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.940 of 2025 ----- M/s. G.S. Realtors & Consultants, a partnership firm, having its registered office at Pradhan Tower, First Floor, Main Road, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Chutia, District Ranchi, represented through its authorized signatory and partner Mr. Ravidra Pradhan, son of Lt. G.S. Pradhan, resident of Pradhan Mansion, North Office Para, Doranda, Ranchi. .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Mr. Arwa Rajkamal, son of not known, Managing Director, Jharkhand State Building Construction Corporation Limited, office at 3rd Floor, JSBCCL Building Project Bhawan Campus, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 3. Mr. Raju Kumar son of not known, Manager-cum-Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Building Construction Corporation Limited, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka. .......... Opp. Parties. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. P.S.A. Pati, Advocate For the State : A.C. to S.C. (Mines)-III For the O.P. Nos.2&3: Mrs. Khalida Haya Rashmi, Advocate ----- Order No.03 Date: 11.08.2025 1. Heard. 2. This Court on 15th July, 2024 passed the following order in W.P.(C) No.1921 of 2024: “In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “a) For issuance of direction upon the respondents release the balance security deposit to the tune of Rs. 13,80,818.00/- against the work order contained in memo no. 591 dated 19.06.2013 corresponding to Agreement No BD03/13-14 dated 19.06.2013 with regards to construction of Regional Food & Drug Laboratory, Dumka as the work has been completed with interest as the same has been withheld by the respondents without there being any fault of the petitioner. And/Or b) For issuance of any other appropriate writ(s) or direction(s) or order(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case for doing conscionable justice to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that suffice would be at this stage to direct the Manager-cum-Executive Engineer, JSBCCL, S.P Div., Dumka (PIU) to dispose of the representation made vide annexure-7 of the writ petition for release of security deposit to the tune of Rs. 13,80,818/- only which were deducted from the bills in the form of security deposit and the same has not been released till 2025:JHHC:22950-DB 2 date due to which the petitioner is suffering monetary loss, as the said representation is pending before the Manager-cum-Executive Engineer, JSBCCL, S.P Div., Dumka (PIU) since long. 3. Learned counsel for the JSBCCL submits that if the representation has not yet been disposed of, the same would be disposed of after giving full opportunity of hearing to the party concerned. 4. Considering the said submission, I direct the Manager- cumExecutive Engineer, JSBCCL, S.P Div., Dumka (PIU) to dispose of the representation of the petitioner after following the procedure as laid down in the law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the party concerned within a reasonable time frame. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ application is disposed of.” 3. This is a case of blame game, wherein the petitioner being made to suffer between the Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Jharkhand and Jharkhand State Building Construction Corporation Limited. 4. Neither of the opposite parties are ready to comply with the order which actually would amount to contempt. However, before initiating such proceeding, we deem it appropriate to direct the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand to call for a meeting of Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Jharkhand, Department of Building Construction, Government of Jharkhand as well as Jharkhand State Building Construction Corporation Limited and to resolve the issue and to ensure that the representation filed by the petitioner is disposed of by the competent authority within four weeks from today by passing a reasoned order. 5. The contempt case is, accordingly, disposed of. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Sanjay/Rohit