2025:JHHC:38212 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.1011 of 2024 ------ Surendra Pandey, S/o Late Hari Nandan Pandey, R/o Chaibagan, Namkum, P.O. Khijri (Namkum), P.S. Namkum, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Mr. Abu Baker Siddhique, presently posted and working as the Secretary, Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Co- operative Department (Cooperative Section), Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand, at present Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi. 3. Mr. Suraj Kumar, presently posted and working as the Registrar, Co-operative Society, Jharkhand, Ranchi, having office at Pashupalan Bhawan, Hesag, P.O. Hatia, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. Mr. Binod Kumar, presently posted and working as the District Audit Officer, Co-operative Societies, Department of Co-operative Societies, Engineer’s Hostel, Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand at present Gongu Toli, Bahu Bazar, P.O. & P.S. Chutia, District Ranchi. 5. Mr. Ravindra Das, presently posted and working as the District Co-operative Officer, Vikas Bhawan, Kuchary Road, P.O., G.P.O. Ranchi, P.S. Kotwali, Disrict Ranchi, Jharkhand. 6. Mr. Prakash Kumar, presently posted and working as the Managing Director, JHASCOLAMF Ltd. Purulia Road, P.O. & P.S. Lalpur, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 7. Mr. Praveen Kumar, presently posted and working as the Development Officer (Marketing), JHASCOLAMF Ltd. Purulia Road, P.O. & P.S. Lalpur, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. … … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Kr. Dubey, Advocate Ms. Rashi Sharma, Advocate Ms. Ruhi Dubey, Advocate For the O.P. (s) : Mr. Anshuman Kumar, AC to SC (L&C)-II Mr. Prakash Chandra, Advocate Mr. Virendra Kumar, Advocate ----- 2025:JHHC:38212 2 06 /19.12.2025 Heard the parties. 2. The dismissal order of the petitioner was set aside by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.09.2024 in W.P.(S) No.5304 of 2021. There was a direction to pay the consequential benefits. 3. The amount which has been paid is objected by the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the amount is on the much lesser side and the amount of 26 lakhs, which the petitioner is entitled to get, has been kept in abeyance on the ground that another writ petition is pending. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts, no contempt is made out. 6. Accordingly, this contempt proceeding is dropped. 7. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the action of the respondents, if he is aggrieved by the quantum. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 19th December, 2025 Prashant. Cp-2 Uploaded on 20.12.2025