Neutral Citation No. (2026:JHHC:28944) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.728 of 2026 ----- Subrato Banerjee, son of Late Nand Gopal Banerjee, resident of Shastri Nagar West, P.O. Dhanbad, P.S. Bank More, District Dhanbad. .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Mr. Ram Niwas Yadav, Director, Higher, Technical Education & Skill Development Department, (Directorate of Higher Education), Government of Jharkhand, Planning Building 3rd Floor, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi. .......... Opp. Parties. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Om Prakash Tiwari, GP-III ----- Order No.05 Date: 25.09.2026 1. The present contempt case has been filed for initiating contempt proceeding against the opposite party no.2 for his wilful and deliberate violation of the order dated 8th November, 2023 passed in W.P.(S) No.557 of 2023. 2. Pursuant to the order dated 18th September, 2026, Mr. Sudhir Bara, the present Director, Higher, Technical Education & Skill Development Department, (Directorate of Higher Education), Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi is physically present before this Court today. 3. A show cause affidavit dated 25th September, 2026 has been filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2, paragraph no.6 of which reads as under:- “6. That the answering opposite party states that vide Memo No.1978 dated 24.09.2026 a reasoned order has been passed in compliance to order dated Neutral Citation No. (2026:JHHC:28944) 08.11.2023 and the claim of the petitioner has been rejected.” 4. It is, thus, submitted that the aforesaid order of this Court has now been complied by the opposite party no.2. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s claim to fix his pay scale as per 5th and 6th pay revision and to pay consequential monetary benefits has arbitrarily been rejected by the said opposite party. 6. Be that as it may. 7. Since the opposite party no.2 has already passed the order dated 24th September, 2026, there is no need to further proceed in the matter. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite party no.2 is hereby dropped. 8. The present contempt case stands disposed of. 9. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse as permissible under law against the order dated 24th September, 2026 passed by the opposite party no.2. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 25th September, 2026 Sanjay/ Uploaded on 28.09.2026