15.05.2026 Ct. No.236 Sl. No.6 akd C. P. A. N. 2061 of 2025 in W. P. A. 6475 of 2025 [Snehasis Das -Vs- Amarnath Mallick] Mr. Rajendra Banerjee Mr. Souvik Ganguly … … for the petitioner 1. At the time of hearing learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, at the very outset, took me to paragraph 10 of the order dated 20.05.2025 as passed by this court in WPA 6475 of 2025 whereby and whereunder the respondent no.2-authority was directed to issue a fresh land looser certificate in the name of the writ petitioner clearly indicating in such certificate the date of acquisition of the land of the writ petitioner and/or his family members i.e. the year 2009-2010 instead of the date of making application for land looser certificate thereon. It is further submitted that though in terms of the said order dated 20.05.2025, an amended certificate (Annexure ‘P-2’) has been issued on 07.07.2025 in the name of the writ petitioner but the alleged contemnor has declined to make necessary correction in the relevant register as a result whereof, the writ petitioner is being deprived of getting the fruits of the said order dated 20.05.2025. It is thus submitted that such deliberate inaction on the part of the alleged contemnor ought not to be condoned and, therefore, the Rule as prayed for may be issued against the alleged contemnor. 2. This Court has meticulously gone through the entire materials placed before this court. This Court has given due 2 consideration over the submissions of the learned Advocate for the writ petitioner. 3. A specific query was made by this court on repeated occasions and in response to the same, Learned Advocate for the writ petitioner however, failed to show any pleading in the instant contempt application regarding the present grievance of the writ petitioner. 4. This Court has also perused the prayer portion of the writ petition being WPA 6475 of 2025 vis-à-vis the reliefs granted by this court by virtue of the order dated 20.05.2025. 5. In considered view of this court, no case has been made out on behalf of the petitioner for issuance of the Rule, as prayed for, as against the alleged contemnor. 6. With the aforementioned observation, the instant contempt application is dismissed. 7. It is however made clear that in the event the writ petitioner is still aggrieved with the action and/or inaction on the part of the alleged contemnor and/or any other respondent authorities in the said writ petition, he is at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. 8. Let urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertaking. (Partha Sarathi Sen, J.)