SANTANU KUMAR SAHA Vs. S.S. PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By consent of the parties the matter is taken up for hearing.

(2.) Pursuant to the order dated 31st January, 2012 S.S. Prosad, Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (Recovery), Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Regional Office, West Bengal, Sikkim, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Kolkata is present in Court today along with the copies of the records. His appearance is recorded. At the very outset it is submitted by Mr. Farook, learned Additional Solicitor General, that the contempt application is misconceived as Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (Recovery), Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Regional Office, West Bengal, Sikkim, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Kolkata was not a party respondent to the writ petition being W.P. 14866(W) of 2007 and therefore, as he was not a party to the proceedings, consequently he was not aware of the same. Moreover he had joined in the year 2008. Thus there was no wilful or deliberate violation of the order dated 25th June, 2007 as alleged.

(3.) Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that as notices for contempt were issued, the alleged contemnor should have been aware of the order dated 25th June, 2007 violation of which has been alleged by the petitioner and in spite of having knowledge of the order dated 25th June 2007 he had issued a warrant of arrest as evident from paragraph 21 of the contempt application.