Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18665 (JHR)

TIPAN BRIJIA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cont.(Cvl)/627/2026 · 2026-07-03

Rajesh Shankar

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:19437 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No. 627 of 2026 ----- Tipan Brijia, S/o Bidhui Brijia, R/o Village-Henar, P.O. & P.S.-Baresandh, District-Latehar .......... Petitioner -Versus- 1. State of Jharkhand 2. Sri Dinesh Kumar Mishra, Circle Officer, Garu, Latehar .......... Opp. Parties ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Parties: Mr. Manoj Kumar, G.A.-III ----- Order No.02 Date: 03.07.2026 1. The present contempt case has been filed for initiating contempt proceeding against the opposite party No. 2 for his wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 27.03.2025 passed in W.P. (C) No. 286 of 2025. 2. Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned G.A.-III appearing on behalf of the opposite parties, refers to a copy of the order dated 23.06.2025 passed by the opposite party No. 2 (Annexure- A to the show cause affidavit dated 12.05.2026 filed on behalf of the opposite party No. 2) and submits that an appropriate order on the petitioner’s representation has already been passed by the opposite party No. 2. Vide said order, the petitioner’s representation for issuance of online rent receipts for the land in question has been considered and rejected. 3. It is, thus, submitted that the aforesaid order of this Court has been complied. 2026:JHHC:19437 2 4. As against this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the opposite party No. 2 has arbitrarily rejected the petitioner’s request for issuance of online rent receipts for the land in question. 5. Be that as it may. 6. Since the opposite party No. 2 has already passed the reasoned order dated 23.06.2025, there is no need to further proceed in the present matter. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite party No. 2 is hereby dropped. 7. The present contempt case stands disposed of. 8. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse as permissible under law for redressal of his subsisting grievance including putting challenge to the order dated 23.06.2025 passed by the opposite party No. 2. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 03.07.2026 Vikas/