Disposed¶25

Durga Charan Dey v. Swagat Das,B.D.O,Baranga Block,Cuttack

Orissa HC22 Aug 2025CONTC/3248/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition against B.D.O., Baranga Block, Cuttack for non-compliance of order dated 03.03.2025 in W.P.C. No.5845 of 2025 (disposal of representation for water supply) held complied with on the strength of correspondence of 07.03.2025, 03.04.2025, 15.04.2025, 16.04.2025 and communication to Petitioner on 24.04.2025; CONTC dropped; Petitioners at liberty to file fresh application against WATCO/RWSS; drinking-water grievance left unanswered.

What did the court decide?

No contempt initiated; the CONTC is dropped, the Court having found the direction of 03.03.2025 complied with; the Petitioners are left at liberty to file a fresh application impleading WATCO/RWSS. ¶25

Durga Charan Dey Vs Swagat Das,B.D.O,Baranga Block,Cuttack — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No contempt initiated; the CONTC is dropped, the Court having found the direction of 03.03.2025 complied with; the Petitioners are left at liberty to file a fresh application impleading WATCO/RWSS.

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether contempt proceedings should be initiated against the B.D.O., Baranga Block, Cuttack for non-compliance of the Court's order dated 03.03.2025 passed in W.P.C. No.5845 of 2025. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

The contempt case (CONTC No.3248 of 2025) is dropped.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

The direction of the Court contained in the order dated 03.03.2025 in W.P.C. No.5845 of 2025 stands complied with by the Contemnor.

¶21

Key takeaways

The Petitioners are at liberty to come with a fresh application bringing the appropriate parties (WATCO/RWSS) on record, if they so desire.obiter¶24
The Court noted that the substantive grievance of the Complainants — supply of clean drinking water — could not be answered in these contempt proceedings.obiter¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack — CONTC No.3248 of 2025 (order dated 22.08.2025, Chittaranjan Dash, J.). Petitioners Durga Charan Dey & another (K.C. Nayak) sought initiation of contempt against Swagat Das, B.D.O., Baranga Block, Cuttack (A.K. Apat, Addl. P.P.) for alleged non-compliance of the Court's order dated 03.03.2025 in W.P.C. No.5845 of 2025, whereby the B.D.O. was directed to dispose of the Petitioners' representation (Annexure-2) seeking immediate water supply within two months of the certified copy being furnished and to communicate the result within two weeks thereafter. State counsel exhibited a compliance chain: order communicated to the Contemnor on 07.03.2025; B.D.O.'s letter No.1036 dated 03.04.2025 to the Superintending Engineer, RWSS Division, Mahanadi Vihar, Cuttack; Assistant Engineer, RWS & S, Baranga's letter dated 15.04.2025; Superintending Engineer's letter No.1537 dated 16.04.2025 to the B.D.O.; and communication of the outcome to the Petitioner on 24.04.2025. Finding the direction complied with, the Court dropped the CONTC, observed that the substantive question of supply of clean drinking water remained unanswered, and left the Petitioners free to file a fresh application impleading WATCO/RWSS.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CONTC No.3248 of 2025

¶3

Durga Charan Dey & another …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. K.C. Nayak, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

…. Swagat Das, B.D.O. Baranga Opp. Party/ Block, Cuttack Contemnor

¶7

Mr. A.K. Apat, Addl. P.P

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH

ORDER

Order No.

22.08.2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

¶14

By means of this application, the Petitioners seek to initiate a contempt against the B.D.O., Baranga Block, Cuttack for non-compliance of the order of this Court dated 03.03.2025 passed in W.P.C. No.5845 of 2025. The order of this Court reads as follows:-

¶15

“1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and the Opp.Party-State.

¶16

2. The grievance of the Petitioners as made in this writ application is to the effect that they have made a representation before the Block Development Officer, Barang (Opposite Party No.2) dated 20.12.2024 under Annexure-2, praying to give immediate water supply to the residential houses of the Petitioners.

¶17

3. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and submission made by the learned counsel for the Petitioners although the application does not merit consideration in the present form and further that this Court is not inclined to express

¶18

any opinion on merit, in absence of any objection raised from the side of the Opposite Parties considering the fact that the Petitioners are harping on a genuine relates to the basic need of the society, it is directed that the B.D.O., Barang (Opp.Party No.2) shall dispose of the representation of the Petitioners stated to have been submitted on 20.10.2024 vide Annexure-2, within a period of two months from the date of furnishing the certified copy of this order and shall communicate the result thereof to the Petitioners within two weeks thereafter.

¶19

4. Needless to say that, in the event the learned BDO is of the opinion that fruitful result can be achieved by approaching the WATCO Authorities, the B.D.O. concerned shall take necessary steps to impart appropriate direction to the WATCO while disposing the representation to proceed with the matter as soon as possible.

¶20

5. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.”

¶21

According to the learned counsel for the Petitioners, the order of this Court was communicated to the Contemnor vide letter dated 07.03.2025 but the Contemnor has not initiated any action thereto. The learned counsel for the State on the other hand submitted that the order has been complied and took the Court through the letter No.1036 dated 03.04.2025 addressed to the Superintending Engineer, RWSS Division, Mahanadi Vihar, Cuttack by the B.D.O, Baranga (Contemnor) so also, the letter dated 15.04.2025 of the Assistant Engineer, RWS & S, Baranga besides the letter No.1537 dated 16.04.2025 of the Superintending Engineer addressed to the B.D.O., Baranga and finally the order having been communicated to the Petitioner on 24.04.2025. This clearly emerges that the direction of this Court has been complied by the Contemnor. However, the moot question of the Complainant, being the supply of clean drinking

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

Bijay

¶24

water could not be answered. Be that as it may, the Petitioners are at liberty to come with a fresh application, brining the appropriate parties on record i.e. WATCO/RWSS, if so desires.

¶25