Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 39106 (CAL)

PRASANTA BERA v. SUNY MISRA DIST INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS SE SOUTH 24 PARGANAS

WPCRC/43/2026 · 2026-09-08

Rai Chattopadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Ct.No.652 D/L 08.09.2026 01 Saikat Mukherjee WPCRC/43/2026 in WPA/25229/2013 PRASANTA BERA VS. SUNY MISRA, DIST INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS (S.E) SOUTH 24 PARGANAS Mr. P.C. Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Subir Hazra, Adv. Mr. Sukumar Sarkar, Adv. Ms. Paeyl Mazumder, Adv. …For the Writ Petitioner/Applicant 1. Writ petitioner/applicant is represented. 2. The alleged contemnor is personally present in Court. 3. Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner/applicant submits that alleged contemnor has filed the report dated September 7, 2026, stating about compliance by him with the Court’s order dated 13th June, 2025, in WPA 25229 of 2013. 4. The report is handed over to Court and taken on record. 5. Considering the same it is found that the Court’s order as above has been duly and substantially complied with by the alleged contemnor. 6. Let a copy of this report be handed over to Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate for the petitioner. 7. On the finding as above, the contempt application being WPCRC 43 of 2026 is disposed of. 8. The Rule issued earlier be discharged. 9. Personal appearance of the alleged contemnor is dispensed with. 10. The petitioner, however, can move the appropriate forum seeking interest on delayed payment, if so advised. (RAI CHATTOPADHYAY, J.)