M.John v. Abhishek Guliya

01.12.2023 Court No.13 Item No.1 sp

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR CPAN 52 of 2023 In WPA 779 of 2022 Shri M. John Vs.

Mr. Abhishek Guliya, Assistant Commissioner, Campbell Bay, Great Nicobar (Through Video Conference) Mrs. Anjali Nag ... For the Petitioner.

Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty Mr. Ramendu Agarwal ... For the alleged contemnor.

1.

A purported affidavit of compliance has been field by the alleged contemnor, which is taken on record. 2.

An order dated November 17, 2023 is annexed to the affidavit. The said order is stated to be in response to the petitioner's application for eviction of his children from this property at Campbell Bay. This according to the contemnor is compliance of the order of this Court dated 14th December, 2022 passed in WP 779 of 2022. 3.

Ms. Nag, learned counsel for the petitioner submit that her client needed to sell his property at Campbell for his medical treatment and his expenses. Her client was not seeking any maintenance at all from his children. 4.

It is further submitted by Ms. Nag and apparent from the records that an agreement for sale was entered into by the petitioner with a third party. When the third

party went to inspect the property before execution of final conveyance, he found the same forcefully occupied by the son and daughter-in-law of the petitioner. The intending purchaser was threatened with dire consequences, if the possession of the son and his wife and family is disturbed. 5.

It appears from the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, the application under Chapter-VI Rule 20 of the Andaman & Nicobar Icelands Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2012, was disposed of without any orders as the petitioner did not want maintenance.

6.

Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, learned counsel for the alleged contemnor would argue that the Commissioner was actually of the view that he does not have powers to order of eviction of the children under the aforesaid Rules. 7.

The Commissioner should have stated as such in the impugned order.

8.

Let a fresh order be passed by the Commissioner in this regard within a period of 2 weeks from date. 9.

It is elementary that a quasi-judicial authority must address every prayer made in an application in the manner he understands the same. Not addressing a basic prayer made in the application to attempt to frustrate orders of the Court.

10.

The Assistant Commissioner, Campbell Bay is found guilty of contempt of Court.

11.

In the facts and circumstances aforesaid, this Court issues a stern warning to the Assistant Commissioner to act in accordance with law and comply with orders of the High Court in letter and spirit.

12.

With the aforesaid directions, the contempt application shall stand disposed of. Rule, if any, shall stand discharged.

13.

Personal presence of the alleged contemnor is dispensed with.

14.

There shall be no order as to costs.

15.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)