2504 2025 FRIDAY COURT : SCB-654 ITEM : DL-75 MATTER : CPAN STATUS : DISMISSED BENCH ID : 266312 AR : NANDY IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE CPAN 699 OF 2018 in WPA 13955 OF 2017 SAZIDA KHATUN Vs. NITYANANDA GAYEN & ANR. MR. MONIRUZZAMAN, ADVOCATE MR. JAHANGIR BADSHA, ADVOCATE ……for the Petitioner MR. SANTANU KUMAR MITRA, ADVOCATE MR. AMARTYA PAL, ADVOCATE ……for the alleged contemnors 1. The instant contempt application has been filed alleging non-compliance of an order dated 16.05.2017 passed by the Hon’ble Court. 2. By the aforesaid order the Hon’ble Judge had directed the Block Medical Officer of Health, Khargram, Murshidabad to consider and take a decision in the matter regarding rejoining of the petitioner as Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA) Karmee. The Court had also directed that the concerned Officer would complete the process of considering and deciding the issue within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of the order upon giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or her authorized representatives and thereafter communicate such decision to the petitioner within one week. 3. An affidavit of compliance has been filed by the alleged contemnor on 28.01.2025. 4. It appears from the affidavit of compliance that P a g e | 2 the order dated 16.05.2017 has already been complied with inasmuch as the concerned Officer has taken a decision on 04.11.2017 that the petitioner- Sazia Khatun had appeared and produced documents relating to her ASHA recruitment and for that she is eligible for joining the post of ASHA under the concerned Scheme. 5. An exception to the affidavit of compliance has also been filed. 6. The petitioner argues that the concerned officer is presently seeking to review his own order, as would appear from the communication dated 23.12.2024 and the order-sheet dated 15.01.2025. 7. These subsequent events of review and the order passed therein cannot be looked into in this limited contempt jurisdiction and hence are beyond the scope of the present application. 8. The petitioner is at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings on the basis of this fresh cause of action arising out the order of review, if so advised. 9. The contempt application being CPAN 699 of 2018 is thus dismissed. (REETOBROTO KUMAR MITRA, J) P a g e | 3 P a g e | 4