[2026:JHHC:11009-DB] Page | 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Cvl.) No. 711 of 2025 --------- Pradeep Ram Kashyap, aged about 45 years, s/o Bhuneshwar Ram Kashyap, R/o Village-Hutar, P.O. Tangar, P.S. Chanho, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand 835214. … … Petitioner Versus 1. State of Jharkhand. 2. Mrs. Alka Tiwari, W/o-D.K. Tiwari, Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, office situated at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. + P.S.- Dhurwa, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand, 3. Kripanand Jha, S/o not known to the Petitioner, Principal Secretary, Department of Welfare, Government of Jharkhand, office situated at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O.+ P.S.- Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. Karma Zimpa Bhutiya, s/o not known to the petitioner, the Special Secretary, Department of Welfare, Government of Jharkhand at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi. 5. Ajaynath Jha, s/o not known to the petitioner, Tribal Welfare Commissioner, Government of Jharkhand, Office situate at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. + P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 6. Sudhir Bada, s/o not known to the petitioner, the Joint Secretary, Department of Welfare, Government of Jharkhand, Office situated at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S.-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi. … … Opp. Parties --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Binod Singh, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Kishore Kr. Singh, SC-V --------- 05/Dated: 17th April, 2026 1. The instant contempt case has been filed against the opposite parties for alleged, deliberate and willful non-compliance of the order dated 08.04.2024 passed by this Court in Cont. Case (Civil) No. 137 of 2019; Cont. Case (Civil) No. 514 of 2018 and Cont. Case (Civil) No. 36 of 2019. 2. Learned counsel for the opp. parties has submitted that the aforesaid Cont. Case (Civil) No. 137 of 2019; Cont. Case (Civil) No. 514 of 2018 and Cont. Case (Civil) No. 36 of 2019 arise from the order dated 30.04.2018 passed in W.P.(PIL) No. 4439 of 2017. [2026:JHHC:11009-DB] Page | 2 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has submitted by referring to the paragraph- 3 of the order passed in W.P.(PIL) No. 4439 of 2017 that a sum of Rs. 9,37,76,000/- (Rs. Nine Crore Thirty Seven Lacs Seventy Six Thousand) was available for the particular scheme, i.e., the Income Generating Scheme under the Integrated Tribal Development Plan (I.T.D.P), out of which, Rs. 8,70,00,000/- (Rs. Eight Crore Seventy Lacs) has already been utilized. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties has submitted that the out of rest of the amount, which was directed to be utilized, i.e., to the tune of Rs. 67,76,000/- (Rs.Sixty Seven Lacs Seventy Six Thousand), has also been utilized as the reference given in the show cause dated 03.02.2026 particularly at paragraph-8, 9, 10 and 11 thereof. 5. The entire amount, which has been referred after taking into consideration by this Court, vide order dated 30.04.2018 passed in W.P.(PIL) No. 4439 of 2017 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, which is subject matter of the present contempt case, as per the opposite parties, has already been utilized. 6. Mr. Binod Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the particular scheme since is for the purpose of welfare of the marginalized class, and as such, the fund is to be released and utilized on the basis of the financial year regularly. But for the rest of the financial year, the amount is not been regularly released. 7. The said contention has seriously been objected by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opp. parties by submitting that the question of release of further amount other than the subject matter of the contempt case which was for the financial year 2008 and 2009 cannot be within the scope of the contempt case. 8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, has sought leave of this Court not to pursue and withdraw this contempt case with liberty to avail the remedy available for redressal of the grievances. [2026:JHHC:11009-DB] Page | 3 9. Order being complied with, the instant contempt case therefore is disposed of. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum for the redressal of the grievances, if any, for the subsequent financial years. 10. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Sanjay Prasad, J.) 17th April, 2026 Saurabh/-