ANIL PRASAD v. J.C. ROY, THE GENERAL MANAGER, EASTERN JHARIA AREA, BHOWRA, M/S. BHARAT COKING, COAL LIMITED
Cont.(Cvl)/1451/2025 · 2026-03-20
Rajesh Shankar
Public Interest Litigationbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9647 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9647 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:JHHC:7982
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cont. Case (Civil) No. 1451 of 2025
Anil Prasad
….. Petitioner
Versus
1. Mr. J. C. Roy, General Manager, Eastern Jharia Area, Bhowra, M/S Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Dhanbad
2. Mr. Anil Kumar, Project Officer, A.S.P. Colliery (Sudamdih), M/S Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Dhanbad
3. The State of Jharkhand
….. Opposite Parties
-----
CORAM
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
----- For the Petitioner: None For O.P.Nos.1-2:
Mr. A. K. Mehta, Advocate For O.P.No.3:
Mr. Gaurang Jajodia, A.C to G.P-II
-----
04/20.03.2026 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner.
2. The present contempt application has been filed against the O.P.Nos. 1 & 2 alleging wilful disobedience and non-compliance of the order dated 12.03.2024 passed by this Court in Cont. Case (Civil) No. 901/2022.
3. Mr. A. K. Mehta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P.Nos. 1 & 2, refers to paragraph 8 of the show cause affidavit dated 28.01.2026 filed on behalf of the said opposite parties and submits that the amounts of Gratuity, leave encashment and bonus have already been paid to the petitioner. It is further submitted that the settling allowance has not been paid to the petitioner, as he did not vacate the official quarter in time. It is also clarified that Rs.2,21,796/- towards leave encashment has been paid to the petitioner after deducting Rs.1,01,498/- towards the house rent for over stay in the official quarter.
4. It is thus submitted that the aforesaid order of this Court has now been fully compiled by the O.P.Nos. 1 & 2.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts, I do not see any reason to further proceed with the matter.
6. The contempt proceeding as against the O.P.Nos. 1 & 2 is hereby dropped.
2026:JHHC:7982
7. The present contempt application stands disposed of.
8. The petitioner is however at liberty to take appropriate steps as permissible under law for redressal of his subsisting grievance.
Satish/-
(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)