Another vs Sanjiv Bhutani And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 3782 Cal

9th June, 2023
  (D/L No.7)
    (SKB)

                                         CPAN 773 of 2023
                                                 In
                                        W.P.A. 1050 of 2023

                              Sigma Rail Systems Private Limited and
                                         another
                                               Versus
                                      Sanjiv Bhutani and others


                             Mr. Jishnu Saha,
                             Mr. Somdutta Bhattacharyya,
                             Ms. Roshni Deepta Acharya,
                             Mr. Dhruv Chaddha
                                        ... for the applicants/petitioners.

                             Mr. Shounak Ghosh,
                             Ms. Sarda Sha
                                          ... for the alleged contemnors.



                                    Re: CPAN 773 of 2023

                      The contempt arises out of a judgment and order

                 passed by this court on 17th May, 2023.       By the said

                 judgment, the respondent nos.1 to 3 being the alleged

contemnors herein were directed to commence the

inspection of the equipment manufactured by the

petitioners/applicants within seven days from the date

of the judgment and in accordance with the

Specification framed by the RDSO as well as the

Acceptance Test Proforma with the identical procedure

which was used for testing/inspection of the equipment

and with the same frequency as had been done in the

69 occasions prior to the petitioners/applicants

approaching the court.

     Learned       counsel          appearing      for      the

petitioners/applicants     submits       that    the     alleged

contemnors held inspection of the equipment on two

occasions namely, on 29th May, 2023 and 4th June, 2023

and proceeded to pass the equipment under the ATP.

The alleged contemnors, however, issued a couple of

observations stating that it is not possible for the RDSO

to configure conditional hard reset and preparatory

reset in the same evaluator. A second similar

observation was also made by the alleged contemnors.

Learned counsel appearing for the alleged

contemnors submits that the observations are not part

of a final document of certification but a preliminary

document which does not reflect the final view of the

RDSO.

Since it is evident that the RDSO has failed to

hand over the final/complete certification pursuant to

the inspections done on 29th May, 2023 and 4th June,

2023, the alleged contemnors are directed to hand over

the complete and final certification report to the

advocate on record of the petitioners/applicants by 8

p.m. today. The court is constrained to pass this

direction by reason of the repeated disobedience of the

respondents of the orders passed by this court, even

prior to the judgment of 17 th May, 2023. The alleged

contemnors can have no justification to hold on to the

final certification whatever the contents may be, when

the last of the five inspections was done on 4 th June,

2023 and five days have already gone after that.

The alleged contemnors shall be at liberty of

complying with this order as dictated in open court

since the alleged contemnor no.3 is incidentally present

in court.

Needless to say, the alleged contemnors shall not

take any steps which would have a prejudicial effect on

the orders placed by at least five of the railway zones on

the petitioners/applicants. The first of such orders

shows that the delivery period will expire on 14 th June,

2023.

As directed in an earlier order passed in the writ

petition on 19th April, 2023, the zonal Railways which

have placed orders to the petitioner no.1 for delivery of

signaling equipment shall extend the delivery dates for

delivery of the products till the contempt proceeding is

heard out.

List this matter on 16th June, 2023.

(Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.)