Prahlad Ghosh v. Md Kamran & ANR

357.

357.

(ML) (ML) 12.12.2025 12.12.2025 Ct. No. 02 (ARPAN)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

SPECIAL CIVIL Jurisdiction (Appellate Side) W.P.C.R.C. 194 OF 2013 In W.P.A. 27755 OF 2008 PRAHLAD GHOSH VS.

MD. KAMRAN, DIRECTOR OF LOCAL BODIES, W.B., KOLKATA & OTHERS Ms. Debjani Sengupta, Adv.

Ms. Paulomi Ghosh, Adv.

...for the Applicant Mr. Subhrangsu Panda, Adv.

Ms. Haritri Roy, Adv.

...for the Alleged Contemnor No.1 1.

Contempt application is heard in presence of the learned advocates representing the applicant and the alleged contemnor no.1.

2.

Today on behalf of the applicant an exception in the form of affidavit affirmed on 5th December, 2025, to the affidavit-of-compliance is filed and same is taken on record.

3.

Learned advocate representing the applicant submits that order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench on the connected writ petition on 15th December, 2008 was not complied with in its true letter and spirit. Prayer is made for giving appropriate direction to ensure compliance of the order dated 15th December, 2008. 4.

On the contrary, learned advocate representing the alleged contemnor no.1 has submitted based on

decision taken on 5th May, 2025 by the said alleged contemnor no.1 that the order dated 15th December, 2008 was complied with.

5.

On perusal of affidavit-of-compliance affirmed on 8th May, 2025, filed on behalf of alleged contemnor no.1, it appears that alleged contemnor no.1 passed an order on 5th May, 2025. However, from the submissions made on behalf of the applicant it is perceived that applicant is not satisfied with the order passed by the alleged contemnor no.1 on 5th May, 2025.

6.

It is trite that if after decision is taken by alleged contemnor in terms of order of the Court applicant is not satisfied, option which is left open to the applicant is to take steps against such decision taken by the alleged contemnor rightly or wrongly, in accordance with law.

7.

Hence, contempt application stands disposed of and contempt proceeding stands dropped.

8.

However, this order shall not preclude the applicant to take steps, in accordance with law, against the order passed by the alleged contemnor no.1 on 5th May, 2025.

9.

Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon usual undertakings.

(SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.)