Disposed¶17

Aloke Choudhury and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC18 Jul 2024WP.ST/36/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt application CCP 18 of 2023 in OA 204 of 2016 held not tenable by Tribunal order dated 30 November 2023 for delay in submitting representations; writ petition WP.ST 36 of 2024 disposed of, finding no deliberate violation of the Tribunal's order dated 30 June 2022; direction upon respondent no.3 to consider petitioners' individual representations (forwarded vide memo dated 18 October 2022) within eight weeks; Article 226; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction upon respondent no.3 to consider the individual representations of the petitioners (annexed to the writ petition) within eight weeks from communication of the order along with a copy of the writ petition; no order as to costs. ¶17

Aloke Choudhury and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal… — Writ and Judicial Review | Calcutta HC (2024)

¶1

18.07.2024 Item No.03 Court No.11 Avijit Mitra

¶2

WP.ST 36 of 2024

¶3

In re: An application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India;

¶4

And Aloke Choudhury & ors. Versus State of West Bengal & ors.

¶5

Mr. Falguni Bandyopadhya, Ms. Riya Ballav, Mr. Antariksha Karmakar

¶6

…for the petitioners

¶7

Ms. Sanghamitra Nandy, Ms. Subhra Nag

¶8

…for the respondent nos.1 and 2 Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee, Ld. A.G.P., Mr. Somnath Naskar

¶9

…for the respondent nos.3 and 4

¶10

The present writ petition has been preferred challenging an order dated 30^th November, 2023 passed by the learned Tribunal in a contempt application being CCP 18 of 2023 passed in OA 204 of 2016. By the order impugned, the learned Tribunal observed that the contempt application was not tenable since the petitioners failed to submit the representations within the time, as directed by the learned Tribunal on 30^th June, 2022 in OA 204 of 2016.

¶11

We do not find any reason to interfere with the order impugned in the present writ petition since there had been no deliberate violation of the order passed by the learned Tribunal on the part of the respondents.

¶12

Mr. Bandyopadhya, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioners, however, submits that immediately after obtaining the certified copy of the order of the learned

¶13

¶14

Tribunal dated 30^th June, 2022, the representations were submitted and the same were forwarded to the respondent no.3 vide memo dated 18^th October, 2022 issued by the Special Law Officer & Ex-Officio Deputy Secretary (Law).

¶15

He submits that by the order passed in the original application, the competent authority was only directed to consider and dispose of the individual representations of the petitioners. The said order was thus an innocuous one. There was also no intentional delay on the part of the petitioners to submit the representations and in view thereof, the competent authority may consider and dispose of the same.

¶16

Such prayer of Mr. Bandyopadhyay has, however, not been vehemently opposed by Mr. Mukherjee, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent nos. 3 and 4 and Ms. Nandy, learned advocate appearing for the respondent nos. 1 and 2.

¶17

In view thereof and for the ends of justice, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction upon the respondent no.3 to consider the individual representations submitted by the petitioners, as annexed to this writ petition, within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order along with a copy of the writ petition.

¶18

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

¶19

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties.

¶20

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee,J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)

¶21

Aloke Choudhury and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aloke Choudhury and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mousumi Bag Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Rama Mallick Bera Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Dr. Enamul Hoque Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Tirendra Prasad Yadav Vs Union of India and Ors.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Tapan Kumar Dowari

Samapti Chanda and Anr. Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.