2026:JHHC:18652 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No. 885 of 2019 ------ 1. Anil Kumar, aged about 51 years, Son of Late Yougeshwar Roy, Resident of Near Block Colony, Lohardaga, P.O.-Lohardaga,P.S.- Lohardaga, District-Lohardaga, Jharkhand-835302 2. Sudhir Sahu Tamera, aged about 59 years, Son of Mandal Sahu Tamera, Resident of Sarna Toli, Lohardaga, P.O.-Lohardaga, P.S.- Lohardaga District-Lohardaga, Jharkhand-835302. 3. Gajendra Ram, aged about 47 years, Son of Late Balku Ram, Resident of Ward No.15, Ashok Nagar, Barwatoli, Lohardaga, P.O.-Lohardaga, P.S.-Lohardaga, District-Lohardaga, Jharkhand-835302. 4. Anil Bakhla, aged about 57, Son of Sri Falwant Bakhla, Resident of House No.78A, Harmu Raghu Toli, P.O.-Harmu, Raghu Toli,P.S.- Lohardaga, District-Lohardaga, Jharkhand-835302. 5. Md. Tahsin Ahmed, aged about 59 years, Son of Md. Rauf Ahmed, Resident of Bagru Road, Tipu Sultan Chowk, P.O.-Lohardaga, P.S.- Lohardaga, District-Lohardaga, Jharkhand-835302. 6. Balchand Sahu, aged about 55, Son of Late Deothan Sahu, Resident of Bhawro, P.Ο.-Bhawro, P.S.-Bhandra, District-Lohardaga, Jharkhand- 835302. 7. Ganesh Pandey, aged about 35 years, Son of Krishna Nand Pandey, H. No.720, Near Gas Godown, Chhatar Bagicha, Ward no.21, Lohardaga, P.S.-Lohardaga, District-Lohardaga, Jharkhand-835302. 8. Baldeo Oraon, about 57 years, Son of Hari Oraon, Resident of Vilalge- Disut Marai Toli, P.O.-Kamre, Behind, Bundhu High School, Dahisot Kamre, P.S.-Sukhdeonagar, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand-835222. 9. Mahendra Prasad, aged about 42 years, Son of Late Shankar Prasad, Resident of Railway Crossing, Dhorha Toli, Lohardaga, P.S.- Lohardaga, District-Lohardaga, Jharkhand-835302. 10. Samiruddin Ansari, aged about 39 years, Son of Kadir Ansari, Resident of Court Road, Near Hindalko Office, Rahmat Nagar, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S.-Lohardaga, District-Lohardaga, Jharkhand- 2026:JHHC:18652 835302. 11. Ashok Ram, aged about 36 years, Son of Late Shadeo Ram, Resident of Koari Mohalla, Nawari Para, P.O.-Lohardaga P.S.-Lohardaga, District-Lohardaga, Jharkhand-835302, 12. Laxmin Orain, aged about 38 years Daughter of Tewari Oraon, Resident of Jori Gadri Para, Jori, Lohardaga, P.S.-Lohardaga, District- Lohardaga, Jharkhand-835302. ... Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Shri Avinash Kumar, The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project BhawanDhurwa, P.O.-Dhurwa, P.S.-Jagannathpur, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. Miss Akanksha Ranjan, The Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga-cum- Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, Lohardaga, P.O. + P.S. Lohardaga. District-Lohardaga, Jharkhand. 4. Mr. Rahul Kumar Sinha, The Deputy Commissioner, Giridih-cum- Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, Giridih, P.O. + P.S. and District-Giridih, Jharkhand. 5. Shri Anjaneyulu Dodde, The Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella- Kharsawan-cum-Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, Seraikella-Kharsawan, P.O. +P.S. and District Saraikella-Kharsawan, Jharkhand. 6. Shri Arava Rajkamal, The Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa-cum-Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, P.O. + P.S. and District-Chaibasa (West Singhbhum), Jharkhand. 7. Kiran Kumari Pasi, The Deputy Commissioner, Godda-cum- Chairman, Dist. Rulral Development Authority, Godda, P.O. + P.S. – Godda, District- Godda, Jharkhand. 8. Smt. Nancy Sahay, The Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar-cum- Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, Deoghar, P.O. + P.S. 2026:JHHC:18652 and District-Deoghar, Jharkhand. 9. Shri Amit Kumar, The Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad-cum- Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, Dhanbad, P.O. + P.S. and District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand. 10. Sri Rai Mahimapat Ray, The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi-cum- Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, Ranchi, P.O. + P.S. and District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 11. Dr. Bhuvnesh Pratap Singh, The Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh- cum-Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S. and District-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. 12. Dr. Santanu Kumar Agrahari, The Deputy Commissioner, Palamau- cum-Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, Palamau, P.O. + P.S. and District-Palamau, Jharkhand. 13. Smt. Rajeshwari Β., The Deputy Commissioner Dumka-cum- Chairman, , District Rural Development Authority, Dumka, P.O. + P.S. and District-Dumka, Jharkhand. 14. Shri Gholap Ramesh Gorakh, The Deputy Commissioner, Koderma- cum-Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, Koderma, P.O. + P.S. and District-Koderma, Jharkhand. 15. Shri ………….. The Deputy Commissioner, Gumla-cum-Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, Gumla, P.O.+P.S. and District- Gumla. 16. Shri Rajeev Ranjan, The Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj-cum- Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, Sahibganj, P.O. + P.S. and District-Sahibganj, Jharkhand. 17. Shri Ravi Shankar Shukla, The Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur-cum-Chairman, District Rural Development Authority, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur, P.O. + P.S. and District-Jamshedpur (East Singhbhum), Jharkhand. ... Opp. Parties CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD ------ 2026:JHHC:18652 For the Petitioner : Mr. Akash Ajit Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, SC-IV ------ 36/Dated: 24th June, 2026 1. The instant case has been filed for alleged deliberate and willful non- compliance of the order dated 30.08.2017 passed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 5074 of 2015. 2. The show cause has been filed on behalf of the concerned opposite party stating inter alia therein that the order passed by the learned writ court has already been complied with since the petitioners has been absorbed in the District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) vide decision so taken on different dates. 3. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioners although have been absorbed but they are still working on contractual basis. 4. Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, learned SC-IV representing the concerned opposite party has submitted that the grievance which is now been raised that the petitioners are working on contract basis is a fresh cause of action, and for that, the writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 2751 of 2025 has already been preferred. 5. This Court, therefore, is of the view that since the writ petition has already been preferred challenging the part of the order of reinstatement on contract basis, there is no need to proceed with this contempt case further. 6. Accordingly, the instant contempt case being Cont. Case (Civil) No. No. 885 of 2019 is closed and disposed of, however, with the liberty 2026:JHHC:18652 to pursue the writ petition. 7. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) 24th June, 2026 Samarth Uploaded on 25.06.2026