Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1933 (JHR)

Nirmal Singh v. State of Jharkhand

2025-09-19

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

body2025
JUDGMENT : SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J. 1. This contempt proceeding is having a chequered career. 2. By order dated 12.06.2024, time was granted to comply the order of the Writ Court and it has been pointed out that if the order will not be complied with, O.P.No.2 shall remain physically present before this Court. Pursuant to that, the O.P.No.2 appeared in person on 12.07.2024 and on that date, that order has been passed. The Order dated 12.07.2024 is quoted below: “1. At the time of rising of the court, the matter was mentioned by the learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 2 [Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.] on the ground that the personal appearance of the Managing Director is there, as such, the matter was taken up. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 2 submits that I.A. No. 6963 of 2024 has been filed for extension of time to comply the court’s order. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that this is the third I.A. for extension of time and earlier also the time was granted to the O.P. No. 2 and it was clarified that if the court’s order will not be complied, he will remain present before the court and on all these dates, the Managing Director were present. 4. In view of the above, it transpires that the sufficient time has already been provided to the O.P. No. 2 in spite of that, the court’s orders has not been complied as yet. Prima facie, it appears that intentionally the O.P. No. 2 is not complying the court’s order. It further transpires that in two of the interlocutory applications, it was stated that they will comply the court’s order, that’s why the time was allowed on both the times and further in the present I.A., the prayer is also made for extension of time on the ground that LPA preferred by the appellants and in earlier I.As. this was not the ground of time, which suggests that the O.P. No. 2 is playing with the court. 5. It has been pointed out that in the identical situation with regard to the other employees, the said benefits have already been provided and only the petitioners are being deprived. 6. this was not the ground of time, which suggests that the O.P. No. 2 is playing with the court. 5. It has been pointed out that in the identical situation with regard to the other employees, the said benefits have already been provided and only the petitioners are being deprived. 6. In view of the above, the court finds that the other employees have already been given the benefits, there is no reason why the order of this court will not be complied. 6. Mr. Shashi Ranjan, Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. is present in court and he undertakes at Bar that the court’s order shall be complied by next Friday {i.e. 19.07.2024.} 7. In view of the undertaking taken by the Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd at the Bar, the time is extended by next Thursday {i.e. 18.07.2024.} to comply the court’s order. 8. Let this matter appear on 19.07.2024. 9. It is made clear that if on or before the the next date of listing, the court’s order will not be complied, the Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. shall remain present before this court. 10. In view of the above, the I.A. No. 6963 of 2024 stands disposed of.” 3. On 19.07.2024, it has been submitted on behalf of the O.P.No.1 and 2 that the Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation (JSMDC) has passed the order in favour of the petitioners and instruction has been provided that the benefit pursuant to that order will be provided to the petitioners by first week of August and in view of that, on that date, further the matter was adjourned for 09.08.2024. On 06.09.2024, the matter was further adjourned on the request of the learned counsel for the O.P.no.2 with regard to verification of certain documents of the petitioners. 4. Mr. Sachin Kumar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P.no.1 on 17.01.2025 has submitted before the Court that the benefit of the petitioners will be provided by the month of February, 2025 and it has been pointed out that an affidavit to that effect will be filed within two weeks. Compelling situation has been further created by the Opposite Party and that has been recorded in the order dated 14.02.2025 and pursuant to that, further proceeding under Rule 393 of JHARKHAND HIGH COURT RULES , 2001 has been issued. 5. Compelling situation has been further created by the Opposite Party and that has been recorded in the order dated 14.02.2025 and pursuant to that, further proceeding under Rule 393 of JHARKHAND HIGH COURT RULES , 2001 has been issued. 5. On 21.2.2025 the Managing Director has further appeared in person along with learned counsel for the Opposite party. ON 21.2.2025, further appearance of the Managing Director was dispensed with in view of submission made on that day to the effect that the verification of two of the petitioners have already been done and for rest three of the petitioners, their documents were under process of verification and others are being made and there is every likelihood that verification will be done within four weeks and in that view of the matter, the matter was further adjourned for four weeks. On 25.04.2025, the O.P.No.2 was directed to file supplementary show cause stating as to why arrears of salary has not been paid as yet to the petitioners, however, affidavit was not filed and on 13.06.2025, further two weeks’ time was obtained to file supplementary show cause and matter was directed to be posted after two weeks on the assigned day. Further on 22.08.2025, following order was passed: “1. Heard the parties. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the writ petition is disposed of in the light of the decision taken by the Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation dated 08.01.2015, wherein, it has been decided that the persons named therein in the said order will be entitled for all the benefits w.e.f. 2012. 3. He further submits that the writ petition was disposed of in the light of the order passed by the Coordinate Bench in W.P.(S) No.2156 of 2015. He submits that all the consequential benefits to the petitioners of WP(S) No.2156 of 2015 has already been made by the Corporation by order dated 04.05.2018 as contained in Annexure8 of the Supplementary Affidavit filed by the petitioner. However, it was subject to the result of LPA No.476 of 2016. He submits that the said LPA has already been dismissed. 4. He submits that said fruit is not being provided to the petitioners. Now, they have taken a stand that they will not pay the arrear of salary from 2012 to 2025 and the future increment on the 2 basic. 5. He submits that the said LPA has already been dismissed. 4. He submits that said fruit is not being provided to the petitioners. Now, they have taken a stand that they will not pay the arrear of salary from 2012 to 2025 and the future increment on the 2 basic. 5. He submits that this double standard is being taken by the authority, which is state within the meaning of Article-12 of the Constitution of India and in the identical situation, it should be complied with, the stand is not in accordance with law. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party submits that the Writ Court’s Order has been challenged by the State in LPA No.410 of 2024 and in the LPA, the date is fixed for 15th September 2025 and in view of that, he submits that the matter may be taken on after 15th of September 2025. 7. Merely filing of LPA is not a ground not to comply the order of the Writ Court, unless there is specific stay of the order. In the identical situation, the consequential benefits have been paid to others in the light of Annexure-8 contained in Supplementary Affidavit filed by the petitioner. 8. There is no merit in the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.2 not to comply the order, so far as five of the writ petitioners are concerned in whose favour, the regularization order has been passed. 9. In view of that, the Managing Director of Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., who is opposite party No.2 is directed to comply the Writ Court’s order in letter and spirit within three weeks and file the supplementary show cause to that effect. 10. It is made clear that within the said period, if the Writ Court’s order is not complied with by the Opposite Party No.2, the Opposite 3 Party No.2 shall remain present before this Court at 10.30 AM on the next date of listing of the case. 11. Let this matter appear on 19th September 2025.” 6. Considering that the LPA was listed before the Division Bench and in light of that, the above order has been passed. 7. 11. Let this matter appear on 19th September 2025.” 6. Considering that the LPA was listed before the Division Bench and in light of that, the above order has been passed. 7. Today, when the matter was taken up, the learned counsel for the O.P.No.2 has pointed out that the LPA preferred by the Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation (JSMDC) has been dismissed by the order dated 15.09.2025. In the earlier orders, particularly, order dated 22.08.2025, it has been cleraly indicated that the order of the Writ Court is required to be complied within three weeks in its letter and spirit and direction was issued that if the Writ Court’s order is not complied, the O.P.No.2 shall remain physically present before this Court. Pursuant to that, Mr. Rahul Kumar Sinha, the Managing Director of Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation (JSMDC) is present in person along with the learned counsel. It has been pointed out that the Writ Court order has not been complied as yet. However, submission has been made that the Writ Court order will be complied within stipulated time. It has been stated that fund is lying in the account of the Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation (JSMDC), however, that fund cannot be diverted in absence of the decision of the Board of Directors of the Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation (JSMDC), this submission is being made in spite of fact that the person who is junior to the petitioner has already been provided the benefit and based on the decision of the Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation (JSMDC) dated 08.01.2025, wherein the persons selected for such benefits, Chart has been annexed, in which the petitioners’ name has already been disclosed as well as the person junior to the petitioners has been given the benefit. The question remains that if for compliance of the same, no Board of Directors was coming into the picture, how that can be a ground of taking further adjournment. 8. In view of above, it is crystal clear how the Court has proceeded in this matter and every time, the matter was adjourned on the assurance of the learned counsel appearing for the Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation (JSMDC) that the order will be complied with. Much indulgence has already been given to comply the Court’s order, however, the Court’s order has not been complied with. Much indulgence has already been given to comply the Court’s order, however, the Court’s order has not been complied with. If the order of the Court is there and even after maneuvering all the things, the order is still holding the field; that order cannot be thrown into the dust-bin. Otherwise, the federal structure of the Constitution of India will be jeopardized. The Court has already proceeded leniently providing all opportunities to the Opposite parties to comply the Court’s order and this compelling situation has been brought in this case by the Opposite parties themselves. The learned counsel for the O.P.No.2, in presence of the O.P.no.2, submits that members of the Board may kindly be made party in this contempt proceedings. He further submits that so far the things which has to be done by O.P.No.2 that shall be done within a week. In that view of the matter, as submitted that the Board’s approval is necessary, the Court finds that direction is there upon the Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation (JSMDC) and the Board of Directors are required to be implicated in the present contempt proceeding. Let the Secretaries of the following Departments of Government of Jharkhand, whose names have been disclosed by the learned counsel for the O.P.No.2, be arrayed as party-respondents/Opposite Party Nos.3 to 7, in this contempt petition: 1) Mr. Arava Raj Kamal, Secretary, Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 2) Mr. Prashant Kumar, Secretary, Department of Planning-Cum-Finance, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3) Mr. Aboobacker Siddique P, Secretary, Department of Forest, Environment and Climate Change, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 4) Mr. Arava Raj Kamal, Secretary, Department of Industries, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, and 5) Mr. Chandra Shekhar, Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 9. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners will do so in course of the day. 10. Issue notice to show cause upon the newly added Opposite Party Nos.3 to 7, as to why contempt proceeding should not be initiated against them for non-compliance of the Court’s Order. 11. The said notice is being waived by Ms. Omiya Anusha, the learned A.C. to learned Additional Advocate General (AAG) (A1). 12. The newly added Opposite Party Nos. 3 to 7 shall file their show cause within three weeks. 13. 11. The said notice is being waived by Ms. Omiya Anusha, the learned A.C. to learned Additional Advocate General (AAG) (A1). 12. The newly added Opposite Party Nos. 3 to 7 shall file their show cause within three weeks. 13. In light of above discussion, the Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation (JSMDC) is further directed to file supplementary show cause within a week disclosing the fact that benefits have been provided to the petitioners in light of above submission as it has been submitted that the benefits which has to be done by O.P.No.2 will be provided within a week. In the said affidavit role of Board of Directors will be also disclosed. 14. Let this matter appear on 10.10.2025. 15. The Opposite Party No.2 shall remain present before this Court on that day. 16. So far as the appearance of the newly added Opposite party Nos. 3 to 7, as mentioned above, are concerned, their appearance will be considered after considering their show cause.