[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Sangita Kumari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 12 March, 2026
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
2026:JHHC:6620-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cont. Case (Cvl.) No.1267 of 2025
------
1. Sangita Kumari, aged about 25 years daughter of Brindavan
Mahto, resident of village Heth Burhadih, P.O. Burhadih, P.S.
Bundu, District-Ranchi.
2. Juli Perween, aged about 25 years, daughter of Md. Jasimuddin
Ansari, resident of Gadokhar, P.O. Kadma, P.S. Katkamsandi,
District-Hazaribag.
3. Lakshmi Kumari, aged about 27 years, daughter of Jitendra
Prasad, resident of village and P.O. Salgawan, P.S. Katkamdag,
District-Hazaribag .... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Shri Lalbiaktluanga Khiangte, s/o not known to the petitioner
presently posted as Chairman, JPSC having its office at Jail More,
Kutchery, P.O. Kutchery, P.S. Kotwali, District-Ranchi.
3. Shri Sandip Kumar, s/o not known to the petitioner presently
posted as Secretary, JPSC, having its office at Jail More,
Kutchery, P.O. Kutchery, P.S. Kotwali, District-Ranchi.
4. Shri Lokesh Mishra, s/o not known to the petitioner presently
posted as Controller of examination, JPSC having its office at Jail
More, Kutchery, P.O. Kutchery, P.S. Kotwali, District-Ranchi.
..... .... Opp. Parties
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------
For the Petitioners : Dr. (Mrs.) Vandana Singh, Advocate
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
Mrs. Neha Pandey, Advocate
Mr. Mayank Deep, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ashok Kr. Singh, AC to SC(L&C)-III
For Opp. Party No.2 to 4: Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate
------
04/Dated: 12.03.2026
1. Learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 to 4 has sought for
leave of this Court to file counter affidavit.
2026:JHHC:6620-DB
2. Leave, as has been sought for, is allowed.
3. Let the same be taken on record.
4. The present contempt case has been filed against the opposite
parties for alleged, willful and deliberate non-compliance of the
order dated 24.06.2025 passed in W.P.(S) No.2857 of 2025,
whereby and whereunder, the writ petition has been allowed in
terms of the order passed in W.P.(S) No.6657 of 2024 directing
the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (in short 'JPSC') to
publish the result of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Regular
Advertisement No.22/2023 P.T. of the petitioners afresh treating
them as candidates of EBC-I and BC-II and also declare the
marks obtained by all the petitioners, if not already declared, and
if they secured more than the cut off marks for the said
categories, declare them as successful in the said examination.
5. The copy of the order passed in W.P.(S) No.6657 of 2024 has
been placed for its perusal by the learned counsel for the
petitioners.
6. It has been submitted that the order passed in W.P.(S) No.6657 of
2024 dated 25.04.2025 has been assailed before the Hon'ble
Apex Court by way of S.L.P. being S.L.P.(C) No.020375/2025.
7. The contention, therefore, has been raised that even after
dismissal of the said S.L.P. being S.L.P.(C) No.020375/2025, the
order passed by this Court has not been complied with.
8. While on the other hand, Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, learned counsel
appearing for the opposite party nos.2 to 4 has submitted by
2026:JHHC:6620-DB
referring to the stand inter-alia taken at paragraph-17 to the show
cause filed on 12.03.2026 that subsequent to passing of the order
of this Court dated 25.04.2025 in W.P.(S) No.6657 of 2024, one
order has been passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal
No.1455 of 2026 arises out of order dated 25.04.2025 passed by
this Court in W.P.(S) No.4178 of 2014 and analogous cases on
the issue of model answer, the direction was issued by allowing
the appeal in part and by setting aside the paragraph nos.33, 36,
39, 40 and 41 of the order passed by this Court and in
consequent thereto, the matters have been referred to the
Committee constituted by the High Court in the Administrative
Side to re-examine the answer key in respect of disputed
questions and send its opinion to the Public Service Commission
for necessary follow-up action which has been directed to be done
within two weeks.
9. It has been submitted that now the inputs have been furnished by
the High Court, in the Administrative Side, in pursuant to the order
passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court dated 09.02.2026, a fresh
result is to be published.
10. So far as the case of the present petitioners is concerned, it
has been submitted by referring to the statement made at
paragraph-17 to the show cause that while publishing fresh result
of the preliminary examination, the order passed in W.P.(S)
No.2857 dated 24.06.2025, the subject matter of the present
contempt case, the candidature of the petitioners will be
2026:JHHC:6620-DB
considered treating them as candidates of EBC-I and BC-II
category respectively.
11. Although, it has been submitted that against the dismissal of
SLP being S.L.P.(C) No.020375/2025 against the order passed by
this Court in W.P.(S) No.6657 of 2024, a Civil Review has been
preferred being Civil Review (Filing No.1736 of 2026), as such,
acceptance of the candidature of the present petitioners under
EBC-I and BC-II category, will depend upon the outcome of the
Civil Review (Filing No.1736 of 2026).
12. Mr. Piprawall, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 to 4
since has stated by taking aid of the statement made at
paragraph-17 to the show cause regarding the acceptance of the
candidature under EBC-I and BC-II category and consideration
will be given after acceptance of their candidature under the
particular category, i.e., EBC-I and BC-II and if they will find to be
under the consideration zone on the basis of the marks obtained
under the particular category, they will be declared to be
successful candidates as per the direction passed by this Court.
13. Dr. (Mrs.) Vandana Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners
has submitted that in view of the aforesaid statement, the instant
contempt case may be disposed of.
14. Accordingly, the instant contempt case is being disposed of on
the basis of the statement made at paragraph-17 to the show
cause and in furtherance, based upon the submission made by
Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, learned counsel for the Opp. Party nos.2 to
2026:JHHC:6620-DB
4 at Bar.
15. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stand disposed
of.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi J.)
12.03.2026
Rohit/-
