OD 6 CC/118/2025 WITH WPO/108/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE SARMISTHA SENGUPTA AND ANR VS MADAN MOHAN BINANI AND ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAI CHATTOPADHYAY Date: 23rd September, 2026. Appearance: Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya, Adv. Ms. Anita Shaw Saha, Adv. Ms. Seema Thakur, Adv. . . .for the petitioner. Mr. Achyut Basu, Adv. Ms. Punam Basu, Adv. Ms. Sulagna Sen, Adv. . . .for the alleged contemnor. The Court: In this contempt application the petitioner has alleged wilful and deliberate violation by the alleged contemnor/Secretary, Managing Committee, Shree Maheshwari Vidyalaya of this Court’s order dated May 20, 2025, in WPO 108 of 2025. Mr. Bhattacharya appears for the petitioner. He indicates that the petitioners have been granted with the amount as per settlement, by the School Authority. He indicates that the petitioner is aggrieved that the 2 second part of the court’s order as above, directing the School Authority to pay interest to the petitioners at the rate of 9% per annum, for delayed payment of settlement amount, has not been complied with by the alleged contemnor. With his usual fairness Mr. Bhattacharya learned advocate has submitted that the petitioners have been granted, along with the settlement amount, a further sum of Rs.12,000/-and Rs.14,000/- respectively as interest. He submits that the same amount does not tally with the direction of the Court as above and is much lesser than what it should have been. The Court is of considered opinion that in exercising contempt jurisdiction, there is hardly any scope for this Court to enter into the dispute of quantification of the amount of interest, as alleged or shortfall of the same if any. So far as substantial compliance of the Courts order dated May 20, 2025 is concerned, the Court is satisfied that the School Authority has complied with the same by granting the petitioners the amount as per settlement between the parties and interest thereupon. Any dissatisfaction about the same of the petitioners can be addressed by proper forum if petitioners espouse their case before the same. Within the limited contempt jurisdiction, this Court finds no merit in the instant contempt application and hence the same is disposed of upon recording the satisfaction of the court about due and substantial 3 compliance of the order dated May 20, 2025, in WPO 108 OF 2025, by the alleged contemnors. (RAI CHATTOPADHYAY, J.) sp/