24.08.2026 Item No.2 PG Ct. No.652 C.P.A.N. 121 of 2026 in W.P.A. 9342 of 2024 Ajay Kumar Gupta & Ors. Vs. Sri Dipankar Mandal, IAS Director, Public Vehicles Department, Transport Directorate & Anr. Mr. Barun Kr. Samanta………..for the petitioners Mr. Madhu Jana Mr. Rahul Agarwal……for the alleged contemnors 1. This contempt application is directed against alleged willful violation by the alleged contemnors of this Court’s order dated 28.10.2025 in WPA 9342 of 2024. 2. Mr. Samanta, learned advocate appears for the petitioners. He submits with reference to the judgment of the Court, as above, that in spite of the Court finding the proposed creation of route to be not in consonance with the legal provision, the RTA, Kolkata Region has passed resolutions dated 03.03.2023 and the Transport Authority, Government of West Bengal has passed another resolution dated 25.05.2023, by affecting creation of route and extension thereof in violation of law. 3. Mr. Samanta, learned advocate for the petitioners has specifically relied on paragraph 19 of this Court’s judgment and order dated 28.10.2025, which is quoted hereinbelow: “19. Invariably, under the liberated policy of the Act of 1988, there would not be any 2 impediment for the respondent to grant permit on a route, unless the same stands out to be an illegal or arbitrary grant. However, in the context of the facts of the instant case it can be said that creation of a new route vide resolution of the Board dated March 3, 2023, and notification by the Government dated May 25, 2023, covering major portion of the alignment of an existing route and over the same notional single line of travel, would not be commensurate to the settled principles of law as well as the statutory provision, as discussed above.” 4. A report is submitted in Court today by the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Kolkata/alleged contemnor no. 2 dated 12.08.2026. In the same, the alleged contemnor has reiterated inter alia, as follows: “7. The extension of Route K-1 was approved and communicated within the period fixed by the Hon’ble Court, followed by approval of the fare chart, uplading of the extended alignment and initiation of the process for endorsement in the individual permits. In these circumstances, the alleged contemnors most respectfully submit that there has been no wilful or deliberate disobedience of the judgment. They submit themselves to the jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Court and shall comply with any further direction that may be passed.” 5. Further, it is noted that the alleged contemnor in the said report, has stated as follows: “5. The alleged contemnors respectfully acknowledge the finding recorded in paragraph 19 of the judgment concerning the RTA Board resolution dated 03.03.2023 and Government Notification No. 1967-WT/ TPT-18011/24/2020 dated 25.05.2023 in respect of the Hatishala- Kolkata Station route. The notification was issued by the State Government and any formal variation or withdrawal thereof falls within the competence of the State Government. RTA, Kolkata shall abide by any direction of the Hon’ble Court in this regard and, if required, place the matter before the competent State Government authority.” 6. Hence it appears that steps have been taken for route creation/extension. Looking into the judgment under 3 contempt, one can find that RTA, Kolkata has been directed thereby, to grant extension of route, as prayed for vide the representation dated 12.10.2022. 7. Considering the judgment as above, of this Court as well as the report of the alleged contemnor dated 12.08.2026 filed in Court today, it appears that necessary steps have already been taken by the alleged contemnors in terms of the petitioners’ representation dated 12.10.2022, by allowing extension of route, as prayed for. 8. In such circumstances, sitting in contempt jurisdiction, the Court does not find it proper to go into the question beyond alleged violation if any, of the Court’s order, which is, however, not there in the instant contempt application. 9. For the reasons as above, I find it proper to dispose of the instant contempt application. 10. Petitioners are however, at liberty to espouse their grievance, if any as regards the legality and propriety of the decision/resolution passed by the alleged contemnors, before the appropriate Court. 11. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Rai Chattopadhyay, J.