2026:JHHC:988 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No. 641 of 2024 --- Jai Prakash Singh, son of Late Rajendra Prasad Singh, resident of Village- Ambajeet, P.O.- Ambajeet, P.S.- Barkagaon, District- Hazaribagh … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Nancy Sahay, Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh 3. Rajat Anup Kumar Kachhap, District Panchayati Raj Officer, Hazaribagh 4. Smt. Sabita, Block Development Officer, Chauparan, Hazaribagh CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner : Mr. Rabindra Prasad, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Manish Mishra, G.P.-V Order No. 17 Dated: 15.01.2026 The present contempt petition has been filed for initiation of contempt proceeding as against the opposite parties alleging willful violation of order dated 11.09.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 3697 of 2015. 2. Mr. Manish Mishra, learned G.P.-V appearing on behalf of the opposite parties, refers to paragraph - 12 of the show cause affidavit dated 09.01.2026 filed on behalf of the opposite party no. 2, which reads as under: “That it is humbly stated and submitted that Block Development Officer, Katkamdandi, issued letter dated 05.01.2026 bearing letter no. 08 (along with necessary enclosures) addressed to the Accountant General, Jharkhand, to revise the pension and gratuity of the petitioner on account of the grant of the 2nd A.C.P. to him. Copy of the letter no. 08 dated 05.01.2026 has been annexed as Annexure-D to the said show cause affidavit. ” 3. Learned G.P.-V also produces copies of pension revision order and DCRG both dated 08.01.2026 issued with respect to the 2 petitioner by the office of the Principal Accountant General (A&E), Jharkhand, Ranchi and submits that the aforesaid order of this Court has thus been complied. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering that the opposite party no. 2 has substantially complied the aforesaid order of this Court, there is no need to further proceed in the present contempt matter. 5. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite parties is hereby dropped. 6. The contempt petition is accordingly disposed of. 7. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse as permissible under law for redressal of his subsisting grievance, if any. 8. Let the copies of pension revision order as well as DCRG issued with respect to the petitioner be kept on record. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) January 15, 2026 Ritesh/ Uploaded on 15.01.2026