2025:JHHC:37000 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Contempt Case (Civil) No. 139 of 2025 -- 1. Binod Lakra, Aged about 52 years, son of Late Suresh Lakra, Resident of Rehe, P.O. & P.S. Bishunpur, District-Gumla 2. Kaleshwar Mahto, aged about 61 years, son of Jagnath Mahto, Resident of village-Gagi, P.O. Gagi, P.S. Kanke, District-Ranchi. 3. Gopal Ram Das, aged about 57 years, son of Late Sadhu Ram, Resident of ward No. 15, Near Hanuman Mandir, Ambedkar nagar, Raghunandan nandan Lane, P.O. & P.S. Lohardaga, District-Lohardaga. 4. Anhul Hussain, aged about 56 years, son of Sakir Hussain, Resident of Village- Hathu, P.O. Etta Childiri, P.S. Bero, District-Ranchi 5. Alakh Singh, aged about 59 years, son of Ram Ratan Singh, Residing near Ranjan Singh Farm House, P.O. Morabadi, P.S. Bariatu, District-Ranchi 6. Purnshankar bhagat, aged about 51 years, son of Late Bifan Oraon, Resident of Rajdanda, P.O. & P.S. Latehar, District-Latehar. 7. Ainul Haque, aged about 54 years, son of Wakil Ahmad, Resident of Near Jora Talab, P.O. & P.S. Bariatu, District-Ranchi 8. Satya Narayan Munda, aged about 57 years, son of Pela Ram Munda, Resident of Kukra Pahari, P.O. Bend, P.S. Chakullia, District-East Singhbhum 9. Satyaban Maity, aged about 56 years, son of Prafullya Kumar Maity, Resident of Baharagora, P.O. Benda Bankati, P.S. East Singhbhum, District-East Singhbhum 10. Pramod Kumar Jaishwal, aged about 59 years, son of Ram Chandra Prasad, Resident of Village-Juru, P.O. Basore, P.S. Lesliganj, District-Palamu ..Petitioners Versus 1. State of Jharkhand 2. Kripanand Jha, Son of Not Known, The Secretary, Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O and P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi ...Opposite parties -- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN -- For the Petitioner(s) : M/s. Rajendra Krishna, Pratyush Shounikya, Advocates For the O.P.-State : Mr. Faisal Allam, A.C to S.C(Mines)-III -- 2025:JHHC:37000 2 Through V.C -- 10/10.12.2025 Learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that the order has been complied. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per the order passed by the Writ Court, no contempt is made out; however, the petitioners may be at liberty to raise their remaining grievance, if so advised. 3. Having regard to the aforesaid submission, the instant contempt application stands disposed of with the liberty, as prayed for. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 10th December, 2025 Jk Uploaded on 06/01/2026