2026:JHHC:20789-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No. 1115 of 2025 Samina Khatoon, Widow of Late Sheikh Jainul Ansari, R/o Jingi, P.O. & P.S.-Kuru, District-Lohardaga ….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Shri Kamal Kumar Sinha, Director, Directorate of Secondary Education, Patna (Bihar) 3. Shri Sunil Kumar (I.A.S.), Director, Directorate of Secondary Education, Ranchi (Jharkhand) 4. Shri Abhijeet Kumar (J.A.S.), District Education Officer, Lohardaga 5. Shri Janardan Pandey, Headmaster, Project High School, Kuji, Lohardaga ….. Opp. Parties ----- CORAM HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner: Mr. V.K. Tiwari, Advocate For the State: Mr. Jai Prakash, A.A.G.-IA Mr. Yogesh Modi, A.C. to A.A.G.-IA For the State of Bihar: Mr. S.P. Roy, G.A. (Bihar) ----- 14/14.07.2026 1. Pursuant to the order dated 08.07.2026, Mr. Uma Shankar Singh, Secretary, School Education & Literacy Department; Mr. Rajesh Prasad, Director, Secondary Education, School Education & Literacy Department and Ms. Sunanda Chandramoleshwar Das, District Education Officer, Lohardaga are physically present before this Court. 2. Mr. Jai Prakash, learned A.A.G.-IA, who appears along with Mr. Yogesh Modi, Advocate, for the State, submits that the entire amount together with interest, as directed in the order dated 11.02.2025 passed in L.P.A. No. 596 of 2019, has now been paid to the petitioner-Samina Khatoon. 3. Mr. V.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, though admits that the amount has been paid, however, submits that some additional amount may be due on account of some calculation mistakes. 2026:JHHC:20789-DB 2 4. At this stage, we do not wish to go into this aspect of calculation mistake because we are satisfied that the aforesaid order has now been complied with, though learned counsel for the petitioner does not fully agree. 5. In the above circumstances, we see no good ground to continue the contempt proceedings, any further. 6. We have perused the affidavits filed by the opposite parties. 7. We have also heard the officers, who are physically present in the Court. They have admitted that this was a mistake and they had no intention to disobey the Court’s orders. 8. On cumulative consideration of all these circumstances, we discharge the contempt notices and close these proceedings. 9. The present contempt petition is disposed of in the above terms without any order for costs. (M. S. SONAK, C.J.) (RAJESH SHANKAR, J.) 14.07.2026 Satish/Vikas/