Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18055 (JHR)

JAI MAA VAISHNO DEVI STONE MINES, THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR SUSHIL KUMAR MEHTA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cont.(Cvl)/596/2026 · 2026-06-25

Rajesh Shankar

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:18635-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.596 of 2026 ----- Jai Maa Vaishno Devi Stone Mines, through its proprietor Sushil Kumar Mehta, S/o Sri Balmukund Mehta, resident of village- Guhdar, P.O. & P.S. Domchanch, District-Koderma, Jharkhand .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Saumitra Shukla, Divisional Forest Officer, Koderma. .......... Opp. Parties. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Kanti Kumar Ojha, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Niharika Mazumdar, A.C. to A.G. ----- Order No.02 Date: 25.06.2026 1. Heard Mr. Kanti Kumar Ojha for the petitioner and Mrs. Niharika Mazumdar, learned A.C. to A.G. for the opposite parties. 2. This petition alleges contempt of our order dated 24th February, 2026 made in W.P.(C) No.1226 of 2026. Paragraph no.7 of the said order reads as follows: - “Since the petitioner’s application for grant of mining lease is pending, we do not propose to entertain this petition at this stage. Instead, we direct the District Mining Officer, Koderma, i.e. now impleaded as 4th respondent, to dispose of petitioner’s application for grant of mining lease dated 04.01.2025 within two months from the date of uploading of this order, after giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. It will be open to the petitioner to raise all permissible pleas including the plea concerning the objection report dated 28.03.2025.” 3. The two months’ period indicated above has already expired. The District Mining Officer, Koderma has neither disposed of the petitioner’s application nor has he bothered to seek any extension of time. Now it is pointed out that the District Mining Officer has initiated the process but the files are pending with the Divisional Forest Officer, Koderma. 2026:JHHC:18635-DB 2 4. Once there is a Court order, all the opposite parties must ensure that the directions contained therein are complied with. Therefore, we expect the Divisional Forest Officer, Koderma to submit his report on the file alleged to have been received by him promptly so that the District Mining Officer can now dispose of the petitioner’s application for grant of lease within the next 15 days. 5. To that extent, we extend the period referred to in paragraph no.7 of our order dated 24th February, 2026. We expect that the District Mining Officer, Koderma to follow up the matter with the Divisional Forest Officer, Koderma and we expect that the Divisional Forest Officer to submit his report promptly so that the court orders are complied with. 6. The District Mining Officer, Koderma must communicate his decision to the petitioner within the next 15 days and file a compliance report in this Court by 17th July, 2026 after giving an advance copy to the learned counsel for the petitioner. 7. With the above directions, we are disposing of the contempt petition but posting the matter on 20th July, 2026 for considering the compliance report. If there is no compliance, then, we clarify that we will be forced to take very serious view of the matter. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 25th June, 2026 Sanjay/Rohit Uploaded on 29.06.2026