S/L 22 07.08.2026 Court No.04 B.K.N W.P.S.T. 149 of 2026 Ashima Mondal Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Bharat Bhushan, Mr. Tamal Mondal, Ms. Samriddhi Dwibedi … for the Petitioner. 1. The writ petitioner was the applicant before the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal (for short ‘Tribunal) in the contempt proceeding (CCP 77 of 2022). The petitioner was complaining non-compliance of the Tribunal’s directions on her Original Application O.A. No. 324 of 2020. The Tribunal directed the authority to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s representation, “strictly adhering to settled principles of law laid down in O.A. No. 1646 of 1998 and in W.P.S.T. No. 147 of 2009”, within a stipulated time frame. 2. The authorities disposed of the representation by a reasoned order dated 14.11.2022 in the following terms: “However, going through the records and documents of Smt. Ashima Mondal it has been observed that Smt. Mondal was not an applicant or Party in the case referred herein. Hence, Relief as sought for by the petitioner has been considered and rejected.” 3. The learned Advocate for the writ petitioner submits that the substantial relief claimed in the Original Application was to provide benefits under the career advancement 2 scheme (C.A.S.) considering the continuous service rendered by the applicant writ petitioners, who superannuated as Supervisors under the integrated Child Development Scheme (I.C.D.S.) in Scale 9. 4. Since such benefit was granted to the others similarly situated in O.A. No. 1646 of 1998 and W.P.S.T. No. 147 of 2009, and the Tribunal in unambiguous terms directed for consideration adhering to the settled principles of law laid down in O.A. No. 1646 of 1998 (supra), there was no scope/ option for the authorities to reject the petitioner’s claim by a one line order, by stating that the writ petitioners were not parties to the O.A. No. 1646 of 1998 (supra). 5. The petitioner, therefore approached the Tribunal alleging that the reasoned order dated 14.11.2022 was in willful and deliberate defiance of the order dated 11.03.2022 passed in O.A. No. 324 of 2020. The Tribunal was of the view that a case for willful and deliberate defiance was not made out since the authority passed the reasoned order dated 14.11.2022. The CCP 77 of 2022 filed by the writ petitioner was, therefore, disposed of dropping the contempt proceeding. The order dated 19.02.2025 passed in CCP 77 of 2022 was put to challenge in the present writ petition. 6. After making some submissions, the learned Advocate for the writ petitioner seeks leave to assail the so called “reasoned order” dated 14.11.2022 passed by the 3 Director, I.C.D.S. in appropriate proceeding in accordance with law. 7. With liberty as prayed for the writ petition is disposed of. 8. We make it clear that we have not gone into the merit of the reasoned order, and all issues are left open to be agitated by the petitioner. 9. Urgent Certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all necessary formalities. (Madhuresh Prasad, J.) (Prasenjit Biswas, J.)