Calcutta High Court
CPAN/133/2025 of ABDUL SHAZID Vs DR UTPAL SHARMA PRINCIPAL DR BR AMBEDKAR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY on 9 June 2026
Item Nos. 12 & 13 Court No.11 KCP CPAN 133 of 2025 Abdul Shazid - Versus - Dr. Utpal Sharma in WPCT 118 of 2024 + IA No.CAN 1 of 2024 with RVW 332 of 2024 + IA No.CAN 1 of 2024 + IA No.CAN 2 of 2025 Secretary, Education, A & N Administration, Secretariat & Others - Versus –
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
09.06.2026 Item Nos. 12 & 13 Court No.11 KCP
CPAN 133 of 2025
Abdul Shazid
- Versus - Dr. Utpal Sharma in WPCT 118 of 2024 + IA No.CAN 1 of 2024
with
RVW 332 of 2024 + IA No.CAN 1 of 2024 + IA No.CAN 2 of 2025 Secretary, Education, A & N Administration, Secretariat & Others
- Versus – Shri Abdul Shazid & Anr.
Mr. Tapan Kumar Bhattacharya Mr. Aviroop Bhattacharya
…for the petitioner
Mr. Swatarup Banerjee
Ms. Mary Datta
Mr. P. Banerjee
Mr. S. Chakraborty
….for the U.O.I.
Records reveal that the writ petition being WPCT 118 of 2024 was disposed of by this Court by an order dated 16th August, 2024 directing the respondents therein to appoint the writ petitioner to the concerned post within six weeks from the date of communication of the order. Subsequent thereto, a review petition being RVW 332 of 2024 was filed by the respondents on 7th November, 2024. Alleging violation of the order passed in the writ petition, a contempt application being CPAN 133 of 2025 was also filed by the petitioner on 21st January, 2025.
2 When the matters last appeared before this Court on 21st May, 2026, Mr. Banerjee entered appearance on behalf of the alleged contemnor and prayed for an accommodation to avail necessary instruction. Today, Mr. Banerjee submits upon instruction that the order passed by this Court would be complied with. However, for completing the entire process, the time towards compliance may be extended for a period of two months from date. Mr. Bhattacharya, learned advocate enters appearance on behalf of the petitioner. As the alleged contemnor would be complying with the order passed in the writ petition, the review petition being RVW 332 of 2024 and its connected applications are dismissed. We are also not inclined to proceed with the contempt application any further and the same is, accordingly, disposed of since the alleged contemnor would be complying with the order passed in the writ petition within a period of two months from date. Further appearance of the alleged contemnor, who has appeared today online, is dispensed with.
(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)