2026:JHHC:21234 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Contempt Case (Civil) No. 1307 of 2025 Awadh Agencies, Kamal Villa, Haider Ali Road, Kokar, Ranchi, through its Partner namely, Rakesh Kumar Sharma, S/o Sri Awadhesh Kumar Sharma, R/o Kamal Villa, Haider Ali Road, Kokar, Ranchi ... … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Smt. Vandana Dadel, the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Jail & Disaster Management, Ranchi 3. Shri Anurag Gupta, the Director General of Police, Jharkhand Police Headquarters, Dhurwa, Ranchi 4. Shri Pankaj Kamboj, the Managing Director, Jharkhand Police Housing Corporation Limited, Line Tank Road, Ranchi 5. Shri Jay Prakash Singh, the Chief Engineer, Jharkhand Police Housing Corporation Limited, Line Tank Road, Ranchi 6. Shri Vishal Ranjan, the Executive Engineer, Jharkhand Police Housing Corporation Limited, Line Tank Road, Ranchi ... … Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party No. 1 : Mrs. Neeharika Mazumdar, AC to AG For the Opp. Party Nos. 2 to 5 : Mr. Raj Vardhan, AC to Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate ----- 05/18.07.2026 The present contempt petition has been filed for initiating a contempt proceeding against the contemnors/opposite parties alleging wilful violation of the order dated 07.04.2025 passed in W.P.(C) No. 3155 of 2024. 2. Mr. Raj Vardhan, AC to Mr. Krishna Murari, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 to 5, refers to paragraph-6 of the show cause affidavit dated 03.02.2026 and submits that after allocation of fund from the Government, the petitioner has been paid an amount of Rs. 1,11,49,515/- for the work in question vide cheque dated 20.01.2026 (a copy of the details of payment along with cheque has been annexed with the show cause affidavit). 3. It is thus submitted that the aforesaid order of this 2026:JHHC:21234 2 Court has now been complied. 4. As against this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the opposite party nos. 2 to 5 have delayed the payment of admitted dues for the work in question to the petitioner, the said amount should have been paid along with suitable interest. 5. Be that as it may. 6. Since in compliance of the aforesaid order of this Court, the admitted payment has already been made to the petitioner for the work in question, there is no need to further proceed in the contempt petition. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite party nos. 2 to 5 is hereby dropped. 7. The contempt petition is accordingly disposed of. 8. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse as permissible under law claiming interest over the aforesaid amount from the concerned opposite parties. 9. I.A. No. 17264 of 2025 is also disposed of. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) July 18, 2026 Manish Uploaded on 20.07.2026