2026:JHHC:2372 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.1317 of 2025 ----- Smt. Anjali Panja, wife of Late Jaidev Panja resident of Jharnapara Opposite to Gayanada Apartment, Near Park Market Hirapur, Dhanbad. .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Mr. Ravi Raj Sharma, the Municipal Commissioner, Dhanbad Municipal Corporation having his office at Lubi Circular Road, Hirapur, Dhanbad. .......... Opp. Parties. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Pradyot Chatterjee, Advocate For the O.P. No.1 : Mrs. Nirupama, AC to Sr. SC-II For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate ----- Order No.04 Date: 30.01.2026 1. The present contempt application has been filed for initiation of contempt proceeding as against the Opposite Party No.2 alleging wilful violation of the order dated 14th August, 2023 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.3487 of 2022. 2. Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned A.C. to Mr. Mahavir Prasad Sinha, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party No.2 refers to the copy of order dated 30th May, 2025 (Annexure-1 to the show-cause affidavit dated 30th January, 2026 filed on behalf of the O.P. No.2) passed by the O.P. No.2 in Building Case No.27 of 2018, whereby the direction has been given to Sri Parimal Kumar Singh, the builder (Rudra Construction) to get the concerned structure removed within six months and to give information of the said fact to the competent authority failing which further steps in accordance with law will be taken. It is, thus, submitted that the aforesaid order of this Court has been complied. 2026:JHHC:2372 2 3. As against this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the said order was passed by the O.P. No.2 on 30th May, 2025, however, the builder has not yet removed the concerned structure. 4. Be that as it may. 5. Since in compliance of the aforesaid order of this Court, the O.P. No.2 has already passed a reasoned order as indicated above, there is no need to proceed further in the present contempt matter. The contempt proceeding as against the Opposite Party No.2 is, hereby, dropped. 6. The contempt application is, accordingly, disposed of. 7. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse as permissible under law for redressal of her subsisting grievance(s). (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 30th January, 2026 Rohit/