RAJ NARAYAN OJHA v. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN IISCO STEEL PLANT, CHASNALA COLLIERY
C.M.P./870/2025 · 2025-11-14
Ambuj Nath
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 40510 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 40510 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:34099 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 870 of 2025
Raj Narayan Ojha, aged about 76 years, son of Late Jagarnath Ojha, Resident of Chasnala South Colony, P.O. Chasnala, P.S. Pathardih, District Dhanbad (Jharkhand)
---
--- Petitioner Versus
1. Steel Authority of India Ltd. Through its Chairman, IISCO Steel Plant, Chansnala Colliery, Chasnala, having its office at Chasnala, P.O. and P.S. Chasnala, District Dhanbad
2. The Assistant General Manager (P&A), SAIL, IISCO Steel Plant, Chansnala Colliery, Chasnala, having its office at Chasnala, P.O. and P.S. Chasnala, District Dhanbad
3. The Assistant / Junior Manager (P&A), IISCO Steel Plant, Chansnala Colliery, Chasnala, having its office at Chasnala, P.O. and P.S. Chasnala, District Dhanbad
4. The Chief Personnel Manager (C), IISCO Steel Plant, Chansnala Colliery, Chasnala, having its office at Chasnala, P.O. and P.S. Chasnala, District Dhanbad
---
--- Opp. Parties ---
CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ambuj Nath
---
For the Petitioner: Mr. Krishna Prajapati, Advocate
For the O.P-SAIL: Mr. Saket Upadhyay and Mr. Sreshth Gautam, Advocates --- 02 / 14.11.2025 This application has been filed for restoration of W.P.(S) No. 1449 of 2012, which was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 25.07.2024.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the list was not marked, he could not appear when the case was called out. He further submitted that the petitioner has good chance to succeed in the writ application and if it is not restored, petitioner would suffer irreparable loss.
Learned counsel for the opposite parties do not have any objection to prayer made by the petitioner.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on being satisfied with the grounds shown and also in the interest of justice, W.P.(S) No. 1449 of 2012 is restored to its original file.
C.M.P. is allowed.
(Ambuj Nath, J)
November 14, 2025
Ranjeet/ Uploaded