Annamma John v. Shri. K.Murugan

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** CPAN/31/2023 IN WPA/132/2022 Annamma John Vs Shri K.Murugan Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar ... for the petitioner Mr. Sohan De Dhara Mr. Ratikanta Pal ... for the respondent/contemnor July 30, 2024 [SR] Item No.22 This contempt application has been taken out alleging violation of an order dated August 25, 2022 passed by a learned Judge of this Court in WPA/132/2022.

The operative portion of that order reads as follows: "Considering all the relevant facts, WPA/132/2022 is disposed of by quashing the impugned Bank to allow the petitioner to defend herself in the disciplinary proceedings by a Defence Assistant who is not a lawyer/advocate since this would preserve the objective of Rule 81 where an employee is to given an adequate and effective opportunity of being heard."

The order was carried in appeal. The Division Bench by an order dated November 21, 2022, disposed of the appeal holding as follows:- " Having heard the parties and considering the materials placed, this Court does not find any reason to take a view different from the views taken by the Hon'ble Single Benches. Accordingly, the Orders impugned deserve no interference.

The appellants/Bank shall be free to proceed with the Disciplinary Proceeding (DP) and conclude the same within a period of six months from the date of communication of this Order".

Learned advocate for the petitioner says that in spite of clear direction of the Division Bench to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within six months from the date of communication of that order, the proceedings are still pending. This is the violation on the part of the alleged contemnor. Learned advocate for the alleged contemnor says that this contempt application is not maintainable before a Single Judge. The violation alleged is of the direction of the Division Bench. Therefore, the petitioner should approach the Division Bench. An order dated August 07, 2023 passed by a coordinate bench in CPAN/27/2023 has been placed before me. The said order discusses the Special Bench decision of this Court passed in CPAN/26/2022 (Shri Sailesh Kumar vs. Ms. Smitha R & Another).

The learned Judge opined that if the violation alleged is of the direction of the Division Bench, then the petitioner should approach the Division Bench and not a Single Bench. I am in respectful agreement with the aforesaid observation of the learned Judge. Hence, I allow the petitioner to withdraw this contempt application and approach the appropriate Division Bench, if he is so advised. I only put on record that the contempt application was filed before the Single Bench on June 14, 2023 However, it has come up for hearing for the first time before me today. There does not appear to be any delay on the part of the petitioner. Since no affidavits have been called for, the allegations made in the contempt application shall be deemed to be denied by the alleged contemnor.

CPAN/31/2023 stands disposed of.

(Arijit Banerjee J.)