24.03.2026 Court No.652 Item No.26 pk/AP CPAN 1712 of 2023 With WPA 2789 of 2019 Soumen Das and Anr. Vs. Malay Roy, Chairman Panihati Municipality and Ors. Mr. H. Barua Mr. B. Das … For the Petitioners. Mr. Soumyajit Bhatta … For the Contemnor Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Shibaji Kumar Das Mr. Dipendu Sarkar … For the Contemnor No.4 1. Parties are represented. 2. A compliance report has been filed by the alleged contemnors, as directed. 3. Learned advocate for the alleged contemnors refers to a letter dated February 17, 2026 by the executive officer, Panihati Municipality, by dint of which the representation of the writ petitioners dated January 13, 2019 has been considered and a decision as to the same has been arrived at. 4. The petitioners may not be agreeable to the decision of the authority by dint of the said order dated February 17, 2026. However, in so far as the scope of contempt jurisdiction of this Court is concerned, which relates to deliberate and wilful violation of the Court’s order, the action of the alleged contemnor is to be 2 assessed. The Court in order dated August 7, 2023 passed in WPA 2789 of 2019 has directed that the petitioners’ representation dated January 23, 2019 should be considered and disposed of with a reasoned order. The said order of the Court appears to have been substantially complied with. The resultant reasoned order of the authority is that vide letter dated February 17, 2026 as produced by the alleged contemnor. 5. In such view of the fact the Court finds no further grounds for adjudication in this contempt application the order of the Court having been complied with substantially by the alleged contemnors. 6. Hence, the contempt application being CPAN 1712 of 2023 is disposed of. (Rai Chattopadhyay, J.)