Calcutta High Court
Camac Leathers Private Limited And Ors vs Sri Sushanta Mitra And Ors on 7 May, 2024
Author: Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya
Bench: Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya
OD 4 & 5
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Special Jurisdiction (Contempt)
ORIGINAL SIDE
CC/38/2024
WITH WPO/1853/2023
CAMAC LEATHERS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS.
VS
SRI SUSHANTA MITRA AND ORS.
AND
IA NO. GA/1/2024
WITH CC/38/2024
IN WPO/1853/2023
CAMAC LEATHERS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS.
Vs
STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA
Date: 7th May, 2024.
Appearance:
Mr. Utpal Bose, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Suddhasatva Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Sagnik Majumdar, Adv.
Ms. Anyapurba Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Abhidipto Tarafdar, Adv.
. . .for the petitioner
Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharya, Adv.
Mr. Ayan Chakraborty, Adv.
Ms. Sohini Mukherjee, Adv.
. . .for the respondent no.5.
Mr. Amitesh Banerjee, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Ipsita Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Arindam Mandal, Adv.
. . .for the State respondents.
The Court: GA 1 of 2024 is taken up first for hearing. The said
application has been made by the alleged contemnors for enlargement of time to
comply with the order of this Court dated February 13, 2024 whereby the alleged
contemnors were inter alia directed to stop functioning of the clinical
establishment being run from the disputed property within March 31, 2024 and
to shift the patients who were housed in the said establishment to alternative
establishments/locations.
Additionally, an observation was made in the said order that the order
would not prevent the respondent no.5 from making endeavor to ensure that all
fire safety norms were satisfied prior to March 31, 2024.
Only and only if such compliance was achieved, it would be open to the
said respondent no.5 to approach the respondent authorities for appropriate
sanction. Again, only upon such sanction being obtained in writing, the
respondent no.5 would be at liberty to approach this Court with a proper
application for modification/recall of the order.
It is an admitted position that no sanction has been obtained till date from
the authorities in writing by the respondent no.5 in the writ petition. Although
learned counsel for the alleged contemnors submits that the alleged contemnors
have made applications but no sanction has yet been granted by the respondent
authorities, the respondent authorities controvert such allegation and points out
that only on May 3, 2024 has an application been apparently filed, which was
much beyond the period stipulated in the order under contempt.
In any event, as rightly pointed out by learned senior counsel appearing for
the writ petitioners/applicants, the period of extension sought in GA 1 of 2024
was four weeks which has long elapsed after filing of the said application.
I do not find that there is anything on record to indicate that the alleged
contemnors even made an effort to shift the patients who are accommodated in
the said clinical establishment, although it is submitted by learned counsel for
the applicant in GA 1 of 2024 that apart from the emergency patients, others
have been removed.
In view of the above, I do not find any justification for enlarging the time
further. Accordingly, GA 1 of 2024 is dismissed on contest without any order as
to costs.
CC 38 of 2024 is now taken up for hearing. In view of the above
observations, there is no manner of doubt that the alleged contemnors are in
contempt of the judgment and order dated February 13, 2024 passed in WPO
1853 of 2023 on several counts. First, the alleged contemnors have not stopped
functioning of the clinical establishment run from 195/1, Park Street, P.S.
Beniapukur, Kolkata 700017 till date, thereby flouting the cut-off date of March
31, 2024 by about one and half months.
Furthermore, there is nothing on record to substantiate that the alleged
contemnors have made any endeavor whatsoever to accommodate the patients
who are housed in the said clinical establishment in order to facilitate shifting of
such patients to alternative establishment/locations.
The pith and substance of the said order was the stoppage of the clinical
establishment within March 31, 2024. The other observations made in the said
order were merely by way of riders/leaves granted over and above the said
directions. The said directions having not been complied with, nor there being
anything on record to indicate even any attempt on the part of the alleged
contemnors to comply with the said directions till date, a Rule be issued calling
upon the alleged contemnors to show cause as to why the alleged contemnors
should not be penalized in terms of the prayers made in the contempt
application. The Rule is made returnable on June 14, 2024 at 3 p.m.
Affidavits in opposition filed in GA 1 of 2024 in WPO 1853 of 2023 be kept
with the record.
(SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, J.)
SP/
