2025:JHHC:26226 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (C). No. 151 of 2022 ---------- Uday Prakash, s/o. late Deo Narayan Singh, aged about 45 years, resident of Surendra Gali, Near Shakti Mandir, B.P. Sinha Colony, P.O. Dhanbad, P.S. Dhanbad (T), District Dhanbad. ………. Petitioner Versus 1. Brajmohan Verma, the Chairman, Jharkhand State Electricity Board, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, Dist. Ranchi. 2. Shree Paritosh Kumar, the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Jharkhand State Electricity Board Zone-3, Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S. Adityapur, Dist. East Singhbhum. 3. Shree Deepak Kumar, the Electrical Superintending Engineer, Transmission Circle Division, Adityapur, Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S. Adityapur, Dist. East Singhbhum. 4. The State of Jharkhand. 5. Shree Anup Prasad, the Electrical Executive Engineer, Transmission Circle Division, Adityapur, Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S. Adityapur, Dist. East Singhbhum ………. Opp. Parties. ---------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Sr.S.C. Mr. Rakesh Kr. Roy, Advocate ---------- 09/ 29.08.2025 At the outset, learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that the instant contempt application is not maintainable in view of the fact that the same has been filed after much delay. However, he referred to the averments made in paras-9 & 14 of the show-cause and submits that as per the opposite parties, the order has been complied. For brevity, paras-9 & 14 of the show- cause is extract herein below: “9. That, the statement contained in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the instant petition, letter no.1056 dated ,24.08.2007 clearly states that, GPF, GSS and leave-encashment were already paid. Only 10% pension and gratuity were hold due to not handing over the charge of Adityapur Store however 10% pension, revision of pension and gratuity all were sanctioned but these are not paid on ground of not handing over the charge. Payment of 10% pension and gratuity were not done due to willfully deny the direction of Hon'ble Court by Late Singh to hand over the charge and demand of interest of 12% p.a. on all retrial dues in un-law full. 2025:JHHC:26226 2 14. That, the statement contained in paragraphs 11, 12 & 13 of the instant petition, Pension has been revised and gratuity has been sanctioned by letter no.59 dt. 11.06.2018 & memo.no.388 dt.21.03.23 and Hon'ble Court may like to direct to petitioner to submit all legal document of next to kin of Late Singh in the office of the General Manager, ESA, Dhanbad so that department may proceed for payment of retrial dues to Late Singh to his kin.” 2. In reply to the same, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is a case arising out of retiral benefits and unfortunately, the original petitioner as well as his widow had died during long pendency but he could not dispute the fact that the order to be complied was passed on 12.08.2011 and the instant contempt application has been filed on 07.03.2022. 3. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the peculiar situation, the instant contempt application is hereby disposed of by giving liberty to the present petitioner to raise his grievance with regard to the admitted dues, if any, before the appropriate authority. (Deepak Roshan, J.) kunal/-