Court No. 38 05.12.2025 (Item No. 10) (AB) In the High Court at Calcutta Special Civil Jurisdiction Appellate Side C.P.A.N. 812 of 2025 in W.P.A. 23781 of 2024 Ranendranath Giri VS Arup Biswas, The B.L. & L.R.O, Kakdwip, South 24-Parganas & Anr. Mr. Indrajit Roy Chowdhury …. For the petitioner None appears for the alleged contemnors. This is a contempt proceeding arising from an order dated October 7, 2024. The compliance report filed by the alleged contemnors shows that the subject land had already been acquired much prior in point of time and have been utilized by PWD. The reasoned order dated September 12, 2025, annexure R-4 at page 15 to the compliance report passed by the alleged contemnor no. 6 shows that, on account of the acquisition of land the predecessor/predecessors-in- interest of the petitioner had already received compensation. It is no more the land of the petitioner or the land loosers, as the land had been acquired and the land loosers had been compensated. It is a vested law. The petitioner today questions the validity, correctness and worthiness of the said reasoned order dated September 12, 2025. This cannot be considered in contempt jurisdiction. Once the Court is satisfied that the directions of the Court stands 2 complied with and/or substantially complied with, no contempt lies. In view of the above, the instant contempt proceeding being CPAN 812 of 2025 stands dropped and closed. The application being CPAN 812 of 2025 stands dismissed, without any order as to costs. However, if the petitioner feels aggrieved with the worth and correctness of the impugned reasoned order, he may avail of appropriate legal remedy in accordance with law, if he is so entitled. (Aniruddha Roy, J.)