2026:JHHC:11799-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Civil Review No. 41 of 2026 -- 1. The State of Jharkhand, represented by its Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand having its office at Project Bhawan, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District- Ranchi. through The Secretary, Department of Forest Environment and Climate Change having its office at Van Bhawan, P.O and P.S Doranda Dist-Ranchi. 2. The Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Cooperation, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. & PS-Doranda, District- Ranchi. 3. The Director, Agriculture Directorate, Department of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Cooperation, Government of Jharkhand, Krishi Bhawan, P.O. & P.S- Kanke, District-Ranchi. 4. 4. The District Agriculture Officer, Palamau, P.O. & P.S.- Palamau (Daltonganji, Jharkhand. .... Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Suryavanshi Self Help Gorup, represented by its Secretary, Prabhakar Narayan, having its registered office at Barkagaon, P.O. & P.S.-Barkagaon, District- Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. 2. Edmund Ming, S/o- Late Edwin Minz, the then District Agriculture Officer, Palamu, P.O. & P.S. Palamu (Daltonganj), Jharkhand. .... Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN -- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Kumar, Sr. SC-II Ms. Sunita Kumari, AC to Sr. SC-II For the Respondent(s) : -- 04/22.04.2026 1. Heard Mr. Manish Kumar, learned Sr. SC-II who appears with Ms. Sunita Kumari, AC to learned Sr. SC-II for the review petitioner [State]. 2. This petition seeks review of the order dated 09.05.2025 in W.P.(C) No. 5866 of 2019 on the ground that it contains errors apparent on the face of the record. 3. Mr Manish Kumar, learned Sr. SC-II, submitted that this Court proceeded on the basis that the seeds which were supplied by the original petitioner in June 2017 were tested by 2026:JHHC:11799-DB 2 the review petitioner in May 2017, which was an impossibility. He further submitted that in terms of the agreement, 50% of the amounts towards supplies had to be received by the original petitioner through Primary Agricultural Credit Society (PACS), and though this contention was raised by the review petitioner, the same has not been adequately addressed. He submitted that as a result, the original petitioner would be unjustly enriched if PACS had already paid 50% of the amount. 4. Mr Manish Kumar, learned Sr. SC-II, finally submitted that the impugned order allows the petitioner to submit the calculations in relation to the amounts due, and this is again an error apparent on the face of the record. 5. We have considered the above contentions, and we think that this is nothing but an attempt to re-argue the matter. None of the contentions fall in the realm of errors apparent on the face of the record, warranting the exercise of our review jurisdiction. 6. Even assuming that the testing was done in July and not in May of 2007, the date of testing was only one of the reasons that prompted this Court to fault the review petitioner’s claim of proper testing. In paragraphs nos. 14 to 16 of the order of which review is sought, this Court has addressed the serious errors in the procedure for testing and held that the same was contrary to the agreement clauses. 7. The issue of 50% of the amount being payable by PACS was not raised by filing definite pleadings. Merely saying that 50% of the amount was payable by PACS without pleading whether indeed, this amount was paid by PACS to the original 2026:JHHC:11799-DB 3 petitioner, does not suffice. In any event, this can hardly be regarded as an error apparent on the face of the record. 8. The last contention also does not constitute an error apparent on the face of the record. The original petitioner had clearly pleaded its case and supported it with documents. In the absence of clear responses or documents, there was nothing wrong with this Court concluding that a self-help group, i.e., the original petitioner, was harassed in this matter by the denial of the dues payable. 9. Accordingly, for the reasons above, we dismiss this review petition. However, there shall be no order for costs on this occasion. 10. Upon our query as to whether the directions in the order dated 09.05.2025 have been complied with, Mr Manish Kumar, learned Sr. SC-II, fairly states that since this review petition was pending, the directions have not been complied with. 11. Admittedly, no stay was granted in this review petition. Mere pendency of the review petition cannot be a ground for not complying with the order dated 09.05.2025, which directs the payment of almost admitted dues to a self-help group. 12. After noting that the petitioner, i.e., a self-help group, was being harassed by the functionaries of the State, costs of rupees one lakh were imposed upon the review petitioner. Even though they have not been paid. 13. Accordingly, we now direct the review petitioner to pay the amounts as directed in the order dated 09.05.2025 to the petitioner within four weeks from today. If there are any calculations that are yet to be submitted by the original 2026:JHHC:11799-DB 4 petitioner, then the review petitioner must call upon the original petitioner to submit the same within four weeks of the receipt of intimation from the review petitioners. Such a letter should be written within ten days from today to the original petitioner. 14. In any event, the costs of rupees one lakh should be paid to the original petitioner within four weeks from today, irrespective of the intimations to submit calculations. 15. If the above order is not now complied with, and the original petitioner is forced to file a contempt petition, then the interest component that we have directed to be paid will have to be borne personally by the Secretary, Department of Agriculture and the Director, Department of Agriculture in equal measure. For negligence or defiance of orders of this Court, the State should not be made to pay from the taxpayer’s money. The officers responsible for such negligence and defiance of Court orders must personally pay. 16. The review petition and the IAs therein, if any, are disposed of. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (Deepak Roshan, J.) 22nd April, 2026 Jk/Amit Uploaded on 23/04/2026