The jurisdiction of the High Court to punish a person for committing contempt of Court is a special jurisdiction and quasi-criminal in nature. It has to be sparingly exercised, and only in cases where it is absolutely clear that with full knowledge of an order of the Court, a person has acted in wilful violation thereof, will the Court exercise its jurisdiction to punish that person for contempt of Court.

JUDGMENT

arijit Banerjee, J. - This contempt application has been filed alleging wilful violation of a judgment and order dated august 9, 2019, whereby, a public interest litigation numbered as W.P. 10804 (W) of 2013 was disposed of. The operative portion of the said order reads as follows:-

'In the aforesaid format of facts, we also notice that the so-called builders and real estate promoters, who have been impleaded, have not responded to the notices issued by this Court. Therefore, to conserve the property of the State, as may be found to be involved out of 1.36 acres, referred to in paragraph 5(b) of the aforequoted portion of the affidavit of the Special Secretary, it is directed that the Principal Secretary, Land & Land Reforms Department to the Government of West Bengal, who is also stated to be the Land Revenue Commissioner, will take due action in accordance with law to consider all aspects relating to the entire extent of 2.71 acres and ensure that there is clear demarcation between the vested land of 1.36 acres and rayati land of 1.35 acres. Thereupon, the extent, which has been granted under lawful authority of the Government to different persons out of 1.36 acres of vested land, shall also be ascertained. after demarcating the boundary between the vested portion and rayati portion, the vested portion will be subjected to such further enquiry as is deemed necessary including demarcation of the lands which have been given on lease by the Government.

On conclusion of such enquiry with requisite notice to all persons eligible to receive such notice, the Principal Secretary of the Land & Land Reforms Department, who is also the Land Revenue Commissioner, will ensure that due process of law is invoked and requisite statutory proceedings are initiated to remove the persons who are in unlawful occupation, illegal possession or squatting over the land. any unauthorized construction and the construction over land which are not those over which construction could be made, shall be ultimately ensured to be pulled down and the land cleared thereof. The land vested in the Government should remain in the Government under its complete control and physical possession to be dealt with by the Government, as may be enjoined by the laws.

Let such exercise be carried out by the Principal Secretary, Land & Land Reforms Department / Land Revenue commissioner within an outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. We clarify that all issues raised intra-parties as also those which may arise between other persons, who may be eligible to participate in proceedings before the Land Revenue Commissioner, will be left open and the matter shall be decided by the Land Revenue Commissioner untrammelled by anything stated herein'.

2. appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned Senior Counsel, submitted that with full knowledge of the said order, the Principal Secretary of the Land and Land Reforms Department to the Government of West Bengal, being the alleged contemnor no. 1, did not take steps for complying with the order. He said that no demarcation between the vested land of 1.36 acres and raiyati land of 1.35 acres has been made. Secondly, whatever purported implementation of the said order has been undertaken, the same has been at the instance of subordinate officers in the land and land reforms department whereas the direction was on the Principal Secretary to implement the order. The Principal Secretary had no business to delegate his duties under the said order to his subordinate officers. It was further submitted that there are substantial discrepancies between the contents of the affidavit affirmed on March 21, 2017, by the additional Secretary of the Land and Land Reforms Department, referred to in the order of which violation is alleged, and the affidavits filed on behalf of the administration in the present contempt proceedings. Mr. Bhattacharyya submitted that the order in question has not been co