Shri.S.S.Senthil And ORS v. The Union Of India And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WP.CT/9/2025 Shri S. S. Senthil and Others Vs.

The Union of India and Others Mr. Arul Prasanth ... for the petitioners Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, Sr.Adv.

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi ... for the respondents March 19, 2025 [SR] Item No.1 1.

The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 3rd March, 2025. The order was passed in connection with the contempt application. It appears that the learned counsel for the petitioners, in course of hearing, has submitted that he has just received the order by which the alleged contemnors claimed to have complied with the order of the Tribunal and time may be given to him to consider the said order. The Tribunal disposed of the matter on recording that the order has been substantially complied with. In our view, the Tribunal, in deciding the contempt application, ought to have come to a finding that the order has been fully complied with as it involves G.P.F, pensionary and other consequential benefits. 2.

On such consideration, we remand the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration of the contempt application and to consider as to whether the compliance report was in compliance of the direction of the Tribunal as mentioned in paragraph 5.3 of the said order.

3.

We request the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Kolkata to dispose of the contempt petition as expeditiously as possible without granting any adjournments unless it is unavoidable. Further affidavit may be filed by the alleged contemnors in the said contempt proceeding showing full compliance of the direction mentioned in paragraph 5.3 of the order dated 8th August, 2024 within three weeks from date upon prior service to Mr. Arul Prasanth, learned advocate representing the petitioners.

4.

Since affidavits are not called for, the allegations contained in this writ petition are deemed to have not been admitted by the respondents.

5.

Liberty to mention the contempt application before the learned Central Administrative Tribunal after the period for filing further affidavit is over.

6.

The writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

( Soumen Sen, J. ) (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J. )