[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Advocates' Association Through Its ... vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The Chief ... on 18 March, 2026
Author: Rajesh Shankar
Bench: Rajesh Shankar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (PIL) No. 2894 of 2021
Advocates' Association through its Treasurer, Dheeraj Kumar
... ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary and Another
... ... ... Respondents
With
Cont. Case (Civil) No 283 of 2020, W.P.(PIL) No. 1252 of 2020, W.P.
(PIL) No. 2797 of 2021, W.P. (PIL) No. 3018 of 2021, W.P. (PIL) No. 5126
of 2021, W.P. (PIL) No. 460 of 2022.
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
---------
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. V.P. Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Rajeeva Sharma, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Abhay Kumar Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Navin Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Om Prakash, Advocate
Mr. Shailesh Poddar, Advocate
For Jhar. Vidhan Sabha: Mr. Anil Kumar, S.C. (J.V.S.)
Mr. Arpit Kumar, Advocate
For the State: Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, A.G.
Mr. Piyush Chitresh, A.C. to A.G.
Mr. Ashwini Bhushan, A.C. to Sr. S.C.-II
---------
60/Dated: 18.03.2026
1. At the request of the learned Advocate General and with much
reluctance, we adjourn the matter to 23rd March, 2026.
2. These petitions concern appointments to the State Information
Commissioner and Lokayukta. The learned senior counsel for the
petitioners has pointed out that for more than four years these positions
have been vacant, as a result of which the legislations under which these
positions are created and make to function, are frustrated.
3. From the previous orders we note that a long rope was given to the
State in a fond hope that appointments would be made within reasonable
time. At least prima facie, we agree with the learned senior counsel for
the petitioners that there is no will to make these appointments.
Otherwise, it is difficult to comprehend how, for the last over more than
four years these positions were allowed to remain vacant.
4. We also note that on every occasion one difficulty after the other is
cited. Again, in the fond hope that this would be the last occasion, some
accommodation is granted. However, we find that even on the next
occasion, there is no compliance and we are presented with yet some
other difficulty. The difficulties, are by no means insurmountable but they
are repeatedly put forth, possibly under the impression that this Court,
acting reasonably, will not invoke its jurisdiction under the Contempt of
Courts Act, 1971 even if directions are issued for filling up the positions in
a time bound manner. This impression needs to be corrected.
5. Despite the above, in the fond hope that the learned Advocate
General will impress upon all concerned the seriousness of the issue and
the necessity to make immediate appointments in accordance with law,
we adjourn the matter.
6. Stand over to 23rd March, 2026 high on board.
(M.S. Sonak, C.J.)
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
March 18, 2026
APK/VK
