Cp WPCRC 98 of 2023 In WPA 10513 of 2021 Sailen Gayen & Ors. v. Ashim Halder
Case at a glance
- Bench
- SHAMPA SARKAR
Provisions considered
Judgment
Mr. Sudarshan Ghosh Mr. Jayanata Samanta Mr. Indumouli Banerjee ……for the applicants. …….for the State. Mr. Partha Pratim Roy Mr. Lakshminath Bhattacharya ….for the alleged contemnor. Mr. Gobinda Chandra Baidya …..for the private respondent in the writ petition. Pursuant to the Rule issued, the pradhan is present in Court today. Affidavit of compliance has been filed in Court today which is taken on record. It appears that the Jalaberia – I Gram Panchayat passed an order which was informed to the petitioner sometime in 2023. The Court records compliance. If the petitioners/applicants are aggrieved by the order, the petitioners may take appropriate steps by filing appropriate application. 2 With regard to the construction of Monoranjan Sarder, the specific contention of the gram panchayat is that the said construction was made before 1973 and, as such, the provisions of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973 will not be attracted. However, this issue is also a matter which has to be challenged in an appropriate writ proceeding and it cannot be decided in the contempt jurisdiction. Accordingly, contempt application disposed of and the contempt proceedings are dropped. The Rule is discharged. Personal appearance of the pradhan dispensed with. (Shampa Sarkar, J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.