Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Subhasis Guchhait And Others vs Union Of India And Others on 4 March, 2025
4th March, 2025
(D/L No.10)
Ct. No.4
(SKB)
W.P.C.T. 31 of 2025
Subhasis Guchhait and others
Versus
Union of India and others
Mr. Surajit Samanta,
Ms. Sohini Smanta,
Ms. Aparajita Bhowmick
....for the petitioners.
Mr. D. N. ray,
Mrs. Sarda Sha
... for the respondents.
1. The affidavit of service filed in court today is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The contempt application of the petitioners has been disposed of by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata (in short 'CAT') in the same terms as CP/187 of 2016. In fact, the order passed in CP-187 of 2016 on 18.04.2023 was made applicable to the present case. The relevant extract of the order passed in CP/187 of 2016 reads as follows:
"30. In view of the above, we accept unconditional apology tendered by the respondents for delay caused in the process and are also in agreement with the submission of Ld. Counsel for the respondents that there was no willful intention on the part of respondents in delaying the compliance of the order passed by this Tribunal. As noted above and even not disputed by the applicants, as per the direction of Hon'ble High Court 2 as well as that of this Tribunal, the respondents are continuing the processing of the case of the applicants for grant of employment assistance and in such process, even some of the applicants who failed in PET, were further sent for medical examination to process their case for employment assistance.
Thus, it cannot be said that the respondents are sitting tight. On the contrary, the facts unfurled as above would clearly suggest that the respondents were working enough to comply with the directions brought under the contempt jurisdiction. Though, there has been delay in the complying with the directions, sufficient genuine inability and the cause has been shown which were beyond the control of the respondents.
31. Taking inconsideration aforesaid factual matrix in its entirety, this Tribunal is satisfied that the respondents have sufficiently complied with the direction issued by this Tribunal 26.12.2015 and 16.03.2020. Further, we are satisfied that it is not expedient to proceed further in the present group of CPs. Accordingly, in terms of the provision of Rule 13(b)(ii) of the Contempt of Courts (C.A.T.) Rules, 1992, we drop the proceedings and discharge the respondents.
Accordingly, all the C.P.s stand dropped. M.A.s, if any, dismissed."
4. In view of the respondents' stand recorded in the order passed in CP/187 of 2016 way back in 2023, we requested the learned counsel for the Union of India to specify the time frame. He submits that he would come back with instructions in this regard for which he requires two weeks' time.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that similar issue fell for consideration in WPCT 88 of 2023.
3
6. As prayed for, list this matter under the same heading on 18th March, 2025.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J.) (Supratim Bhattacharya, J.)