2025:JHHC:35819 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Contempt Case (Civil) No. 244 of 2024 1. Dinesh Kumar Yadav, S/o Bamshankar Mahato, R/o Village- Chihutiya, PO-Tapowan, PS-Kunda, District-Deoghar 2. Prabhakar Mishra, S/o Bhola Nath Mishra, R/o H. No. 38, Dahua Road, Village-Dahua, PO-Deoghar, PS-Mohanpur, District- Deoghar ... … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Sri Mrityunjay Kumar Baranwal, the Deputy Commissioner-cum- Chairman, District Education Establishment Committee, Pakur 3. Sri Vishal Sagar, the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman, District Education Establishment Committee, Deoghar 4. Sri Bhor Singh Yadav, the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman, District Education Establishment Committee, Godda 5. Sri Anjaneyulu Dodde, the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman, District Education Establishment Committee, Dumka 6. Sri Kumud Sahay, the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman, District Education Establishment Committee, Jamtara 7. Sri Ram Niwas Yadav, the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman- District Education Establishment Committee, Sahebganj ... … Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Abhijeet Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Mithilesh Singh, GA-IV Mr. Bhanu Pratap, AC to GA-IV ----- 12/01.12.2025 The present contempt petition has been filed for initiating a contempt proceeding against the contemnors/opposite parties alleging wilful violation of the order dated 17.10.2023 passed in W.P.(S) No. 4955 of 2023. 2. Mr. Mithilesh Singh, learned GA-IV appearing on behalf of the opposite parties, submits that the candidature of the petitioners has duly been considered by the concerned opposite parties, however, they could not be appointed on the respective post of ‘Assistant Teachers’ as they were found below in merit. 3. As against this, learned counsel for the petitioners 2025:JHHC:35819 2 submits that the petitioners’ candidature has been erroneously rejected by the opposite parties. 4. Be that as it may. 5. Since admittedly, the petitioners’ candidature for the respective post of ‘Assistant Teachers’ has already been considered, I see no reason to further proceed in the contempt petition. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite parties is hereby dropped. 6. The contempt petition is accordingly disposed of. 7. The petitioners are, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse as available under law against their non- selection on the post of Assistant Teachers. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) December 01, 2025 Manish Uploaded on 02.12.2025