Sindhu J v. Anand Vardhan Mishra
Ct-29 ar 29.07.2024 Calcutta High Court In the Circuit Bench at Port Blair Appellate Side (Via Video Conference) From Principal Bench CPAN 19 of 2024 in WPA 1023 of 2023 Sindhu J Vs.
Shri Anand Vardhan Mishra Ms. G. Mini ...For the Applicant/Petitioner Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi Ms. R. Goyal ... For the alleged Contemnor
1. Mr. Thomas Varghese the Tehsildar, Port Blair, South Andaman is present in Court with an affidavit of compliance.
2. The Assistant Commissioner Settlement, Andaman and Nicober Islands has issued necessary orders on 18th March, 2024 which the Tehsildar was supposed to comply immediately within a reasonable time. The name of the petitioner has been recorded in the revenue record by the Tehsildar only on 24th July, 2024. The explanations offered by him in the affidavit is not acceptable.
3. Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the alleged contemnor, is unable to produce any record to show that the document was signed on 19th March, 2024. Even
on the last occasion Mr. Chakraborty could not produce any document to show that our order was complied with.
The Assistant Commissioner Settlement, Andaman and Nicober Islands also on the last occasion could not offer any explanation for the Tehsildar not implementing his order.
4. I am not at all satisfied with the conduct of the Tehsildar. He did not even comply with the order of his superior. The Tehsildar has acted negligently and has disregarded the order. However, since it is his first act of contempt, I do not impose any punishment, instead, accepted his unconditional apology and disposed of the application with a note of caution that in future he should be careful.
5. Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the alleged contemnor, must ensure that the original map duly signed by Tehsildar is served upon the Ms. G. Mini, learned advocate for the applicant positively by tomorrow.
6. On such consideration, CPAN 19 of 2024 stands disposed of.
(Soumen Sen, J.)