Nilkantha Mahato v. Nibaran Ch. Samanta

07.10.2021 sb Ct23

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Special Civil Jurisdiction APPELLATE SIDE WPCRC 11264 of 2003 In WPA 13425 of 2002 Keshari Prasad Mahato & Ors.

Vs.

Nibaran Chandra Samanta & Ors.

Mr. Anirban Ray, Ld.GP, Mr. Shamim ul Bari, Mr. Suman De ... For the alleged contemnor/respondent nos.1 and 2.

Mr. Bhaskar Prasad Vaisya, AGP Mr. Nilay Baran Mandal .... For the alleged contemnor/ respondent no.3 The alleged contemnors/respondents say that the order dated 26th September, 2002, being the subject matter of the contempt application had been complied with long back. The photo copy of the Pension Payment Order (in short, PPO) dated 4th January, 2004 wherefrom it appears that the pension to Nilkantha Mahato, the original petitioner with effect from 1st August, 1990 to 29th May 2003 was released is made over to Court. Let a copy of the PPO be taken on record.

The petitioners remain unrepresented. The petitioners however had appeared on the earlier occasions when the orders were passed in their presence. The petitioners response to the PPO made

over by the alleged contemnors/respondents, therefor, cannot be obtained.

Considering the sanctity of a Government document in the nature of a PPO which has been made over to this Court, I find that the order in contempt is sufficiently complied with.

The contempt proceedings are dropped recording such substantial compliance. The contempt petition is disposed of without any further order. Disposal of the contempt petition, however, will not prevent the petitioners from claiming any further sum payable to Nilkantha Mahato over and above that, which has been provided in the PPO dated 4th January, 2004.

(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)