Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16434 (JHR)

NAGENDRA KUMAR JHA v. SHRI GOVIND MOHAN, SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS

Cont.(Cvl)/1339/2025 · 2026-06-12

Sri Ananda Sen

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:17014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No. 1339 of 2025 ------ Nagendra Kumar Jha, S/o Late Shashi Kant Jha, Village-Andhara Tharhi, PO & PS-Andhara Bazar, Dist-Madhubani (Bihar) Pin-847401, Presently residing at no.D-6, Shakti Nagar, SECL Gevra Project, PO & PS-Dipka, Distt-Korba (Chhatisgarh) Pin-495452. … … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Shri Govind Mohan, Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, PO-Sansad Marg, PS-Chankyapur, New Delhi-110001. 2. Shri Rajwinder Singh Batti, Director General, Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) Head Quarters at 13, CGO Complex PO & PS-Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003. 3. Shri Sanjay Kumar Trivedi (Now retired) previously holding the post of Deputy Inspector General (Legal), (Through) Director General, Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) Head Quarters at 13, CGO Complex PO & PS-Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003. 4. State of Jharkhand, through Shri Rajiv Ranjan, Advocate General Jharkhand Office at Jharkhand High Court, PO & PS-Dhurwa, Ranchi. … … Opposite Party(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : IN-PERSON For the Opp. Party(s) : Mr. Prashant Pallav, ASGI Mr. Bajrang Kumar, AC to ASGI ------ 03/ 12th June, 2026 1. Heard the parties. 2. I have gone through the order dated 27.02.2025 passed in WP(S) No.5227 of 2024. 3. In paragraph No.14, this Court held that it did not find any ground to grant relief as claimed by the petitioner. Thereafter, only by way of passing remark, time was granted to the respondents to consider the reply of the petitioner. Order was passed that the disciplinary proceeding will proceed thereafter and conclude the proceeding as early as possible. 4 Today, Mr. Prashant Pallav, learned ASGI submits that within two months, the disciplinary proceeding can be concluded as per law. Thus, in view of the fact that the main relief to the petitioner was not granted, I don’t find that this is a case of contempt, thus this contempt application is dropped. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 12.06.2026 S.K.D/CP-2 Uploaded on 15.06.2026