PRAKASH SAHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri J.P. Jha, Sr. Advocate assisted by Sri S.P. Jha, Junior counsel for the petitioner and Junior Counsel to S.C. (Mines) on behalf of the opposite parries.

(2.) A writ petition (W.P.(S) No. 933 of 2002 was filed by the father of the petitioner, which was disposed of on 5th March 2002 with direction to the opposite parties to consider the case of the petitioner and decide his representation within 45 days from the date, the order is brought to his notice. It is further contended that the facer of the petitioner filed presentation, which was kept pending, hence a cont. (Civil) Case No. 401 of 2003 was preferred. The said contempt was dismissed in default vide order date 25th June 2004.

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner states that since there is no provision for restoration under the Contempt Act, therefore, no restoration petition was filed. Another writ petition was filed numbered as W.P.(S) No. 519 of 2003, Sahdeo Saha & Shiva Ramjee Mishra versus State of Jharkhand and others. This writ petition was dismissed vide order dated 26th March 2003 with an observation that in case the representation was not decided in conformity with the direction given in the previous writ petition, proper remedy available to the petitioner is to file contempt application and, therefore, second writ petition was not maintainable. Pursuant to the aforesaid order the instant contempt application has been filed in the year 2009. Show cause has been filed by the S.C. (Mines) stating therein that the representation has been decided by the Department of Science and Technology, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi vide order dated 27th January 2010 by the Director, Department of Science and Technology, Dr. Arun Kumar, who was working as Director at the relevant time and thus contempt, if any, stands purged.