2026:JHHC:11261 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.1357 of 2025 ----- 1. Kuldeep Kumar Turi, S/o Late Saryu Turi, resident of Village & P.O. Sirsiya, P.S. Giridih (Muffasil), District-Giridih. 2. Roshan Das, S/o Shri Sanju Das, resident of Village-Budhudih, P.O.-Bena, P.S. & District-Jamtara. .......... Petitioners. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Shri Kripa Nand Jha, presently holding the post of Secretary, Scheduled Tribe, Scheduled Caste, Minority and Backward Class Welfare Department, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 3. Shri Ramniwash Yadav, presently holding the post of Deputy Commissioner, Giridih. 4. Shri Ravi Anand, presently holding the post of Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara. .......... Opp. Parties. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate For the O.Ps. : Mr. Amrit Raj Kisku, A.C. to G.A.-V ----- Order No.03 Date: 18.04.2026 1. The present contempt application has been filed for initiation of contempt proceeding as against the opposite parties alleging wilful violation of the order dated 2nd January, 2024 passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No.5967 of 2023. 2. A show-cause/compliance affidavit dated 12th January, 2026 has been filed on behalf of the Opposite Party No.2. 3. Mr. Amrit Raj Kisku, learned A.C. to G.A.-V, refers to the minutes of the meeting of the State Level Committee, headed by the Opposite Party No.2, dated 15th December, 2025 (Annexure-A to the said show-cause affidavit), and submits that the claim of the petitioners seeking regularization of their services has been considered and rejected by the said 2026:JHHC:11261 2 Committee. It is thus submitted that the aforesaid order of this Court has been complied. 4. As against this, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the said decision of the State Level Committee is illegal and arbitrary. 5. Be that as it may. 6. Since a decision in compliance of the aforesaid order of this Court has already been taken, there is no need to proceed further in the present contempt matter. The contempt proceeding, as against the opposite parties, is hereby dropped. 7. The contempt application is, accordingly, disposed of. 8. The petitioners are, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse, as permissible under law, against the decision taken by the State Level Committee vide its minutes of meeting dated 15th December, 2025, rejecting their claim of regularization of services. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 18th April, 2026 Rohit/ Uploaded on 20.04.2026