Dismissed

Ashok Kumar Shaw v. Anuj Mittal Managing Director of the Kmrc and Anr.

Calcutta HC4 Apr 2025CPAN/193/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge bench dismissed the contempt application holding that since the respondent had already communicated a decision on the compensation claim, issuing a rule was not necessary, though the petitioner’s right to challenge the decision separately was preserved.

What did the court decide?

The contempt application CPAN 193 of 2025 was dismissed without order as to costs; the petitioner is free to challenge the respondent’s decision to refuse compensation separately.

Ashok Kumar Shaw Vs Anuj Mittal Managing Director of the… — Contempt of Court | Calcutta HC (2025)

¶1

D/L. 14. April 4, 2025. MNS.

¶2

CPAN 193 of 2025 in WPA No. 28757 of 2022

¶3

Ashok Kumar Shaw Vs.

¶4

Anuj Mittal, and another

¶5

Mr. Rafikul Islam Sardar

¶6

… for the petitioner.

¶7

Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury, Ms. S. Basu Mallick, Mr. Aritra Basu, Mr. Ankit Dey

¶8

…for the alleged contemnor no. 3.

¶9

Re: CPAN 193 of 2025 (contempt application).

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner alleges that, in contravention of the order dated March 13, 2024 passed in WPA No. 28757 of 2022, despite the petitioner having approached the respondent no. 3 in the writ petition / alleged contemnor and having furnished necessary documents, no compensation was paid to the petitioner.

¶11

Learned senior counsel appearing for the alleged contemnor places reliance on Annexure – “C” to the contempt application, which is a communication by the alleged contemnor to the petitioner indicating a decision having been taken on the claim of compensation by the petitioner.

¶12

¶13

In the event the petitioner has grievances with such adjudication, whereby the alleged contemnor came to the decision that compensation cannot be paid to the petitioner since the petitioner was not recommended by the appropriate body, it is always open to the petitioner to challenge the said order before the appropriate forum.

¶14

However, insofar as the present contempt application is concerned, since the alleged contemnor has already taken a decision on the claim of compensation of the petitioner pursuant to the order of this Court, I do not find any reason to issue a Rule of Contempt.

¶15

Accordingly, CPAN 193 of 2025 is dismissed without any order as to costs.

¶16

However, nothing in this order shall prevent the petitioner from taking out an appropriate challenge against the decision of the alleged contemnor refusing to grant compensation to the petitioner in the event the petitioner is otherwise entitled under law to do so.

¶17

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)

Ashok Kumar Shaw v. Anuj Mittal Managing Director of the Kmrc and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar Shaw v. Anuj Mittal Managing Director of the Kmrc and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rasmani Sahu Vs Meenu Batra the Dptt Secretary Minstry of Home Affairs and Anr.

Nepal Ch. Ghosh Vs Shambhunath Soren Pradhan Manikkundu Gram Panchayat Chandrakona

Binod Kumar Agarwal and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Electrosteel Castings Limited and Anr. Vs Sri Biswanath Chakraborty

Rudra Bhattacharya and Anr. Vs the Authorised Officer Bank of India and Ors.

Chiranjib Mondal Vs Dr. (Ms) P. Deepap Priya, the D.M. Howrah