Amitava Lala, J. - (1.) Originally a writ petition was moved before this Court by the petitioner upon being aggrieved that although she is registered owner of a vehicle being BR/14P-8310 engaged in performing school duty at Patherdih Coal Washery under Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Dbanbsd, Bihar and had been coming to Calcutta for medical treatment of her sited son aged Bbout 8 years suffered from kidney failure alongwith of her family members on 20th September, 1998 but the authorities of Motor Vehicle Department of this State did not allow the vehicle to pass through the State even in such emergent situation and ultimately took the vehicle in their custody upon preparing a seizure list of the driving licence etc. on the ground that the vehicle ran within the State without valid permit.
(2.) On 9th October, 1988, this Court was pleased to dispose of the writ petition with the following order : "It appears that great injustice has been caused against the petitioner on the part of the authority and/or by any officer of the authority. Even the petitioner has made a representation 30th September. 1998 to consider the case which has not yet been considered. The petitioner has produced all documents before the Court from which it appears that there is no dispute with regard to the ownership of the vehicle. Under the circumstances it is desired by the Court and accordingly the District Magistrate, Midnapore or any Additional District Magistrate in charge of the Transport Department is hereby directed to consider the case forthwith within a period of seven days from the date of communication of this order and the authority will only consider the validity of the documents so that the vehicle may be released. On any failure on the part of the respondent authorities being caused then the same will be treated as contemtuous cause so far this Court is concerned. With the above order the writ petition is disposed of. There will be no order as to costs."
(3.) Subsequently the writ petitioner moved this Court with the contempt application making a grievance that vehicle was not released in violation of such order as aforesaid. Petitioner further contended that the petitioner ran from pillar to post to get an accommodation which has been refused by the authorities. Petitioner also contended that such office personnel's made costly remarks with regard to judiciary and this Court.;