Meherunnechha Bibi And ANR v. V. C. Roy
CPAN 599 of 2023 11.07.23 In WPCT 123 of 2022 Ct. No. 04 akd Meherunnecha Bibi & Anr.
Vs.
V. C. Roy -------- Mr. Malay Kumar Das, Mr. Manjur Ali Sardar, Mr. S. Haque.
... for the petitioners.
Mr. D. N. Ray, Ms. Indrani Chakraborty, Ms. Sarda Sha.
... for the alleged contemnor.
Leave is granted to the learned Advocate on record of the petitioners to correct the cause-title of the instant application for contempt here and now. The service has been effected upon the alleged contemnor, who is represented through a Counsel. The instant contempt application is taken out alleging willful and deliberate violation of the order dated 8th February, 2023 passed in WP.CT. 123 of 2022 on the premise that the authorities have not taken into consideration the relevant factors in a decision taken on the basis of the direction passed on the said date. The matter concerning the compassionate appointment reached to this Court after the Tribunal disposed of the tribunal application on the premise that there is no substance therein.
In course of hearing it was noticed that the Rule, which is applied by the authorities, was not in consonance with the judgement of the Apex Court rendered in case of Secretary to Govt. Department of Education (Primary) and others vs. Bheemesh alias
Bheemappa reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 1264. This Court, therefore, directed the respondent no. 3 therein to consider the application afresh on the basis of the Scheme/Rules prevalent at the time of death of the Government employee and not the new/modified Schemes subsequently came into force.
It is sought to be contended before us that the authorities has determined the valuation of the immovable property belonging to the family of the petitioners at the prevalent market rate which ought to have been done at the time of demise of the father being the Government employee. The penultimate paragraph of the decision taken by the alleged contemnor would further reveal that he has ascertained the total income of the family and arrived at the conclusion that it is not a case of penury requiring immediate financial assistance to the family of the deceased employee. Whether the findings returned in the said order passed by the administrative authority is factually correct or incorrect cannot invite the exercise of contempt jurisdiction, as such erroneous order is amenable to be challenged before the appropriate forum provided therefor.
The contempt application is entertainable on an apparent and flagrant violation of the order passed by this Court willfully and/or deliberately and cannot be converted into an original Court or the Tribunal, where a challenge to a wrong or erroneous order can be made.
We do not find from the language used in the decision dated 12th September, 2023 that the said authority have accepted or applied the modified or new scheme subsequently came in force.
We, therefore, do not feel that the respondent can be held guilty of contempt and, thus, the contempt application is dismissed.
However, dismissal of the contempt application shall not prevent the petitioners to assail the order dated 12th September, 2023 before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.
(Harish Tandon, J.) (Prasenjit Biswas, J.)