Dipankar Datta,J. - (1.) The petitioner was an aspirant for the post of Excise Constable. He participated in a recruitment process, which was initiated in the year 2006. Admittedly, after physical measurement and efficiency tests, no further step had been taken to fill up vacancies for which the process had been initiated. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner had approached the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal (hereafter the tribunal) by presenting O.A. 198 of 2013. By an order dated 3rd January, 2014, the original application was disposed of by the tribunal with the following direction : ".........we dispose of this application by directing the department to complete the pending recruitment process, in which the Petitioner was a participant in accordance with rule and to complete the entire process including preparation of panel within a period of 4 months from communication of this order with intimation to the Petitioner about his position in the panel prepared after completion of the selection process. ............"
(2.) Instead of taking the process to its logical conclusion by preparing a panel and offering appointment to the empanelled candidates, the respondents in the original application decided to annul the process on the ground that it had been initiated in 2006 without taking recourse to wide publicity/open advertisement and that such initiation of process without wide publicity/open advertisement was not in public interest. We find such decision in an order dated 24th June, 2014 passed by the Principal Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Department of Excise.
(3.) Having noticed that the respondents in O.A. 198 of 2013 had decided against continuation of the recruitment process, the petitioner instituted proceedings for contempt (CCP 97 of 2014) before the tribunal. Upon hearing the parties, the tribunal dropped the proceedings for contempt by its order dated 11th February, 2015 observing as follows : "We are of the opinion that contemnor O.P. had explained adequately why the order of this Tribunal could not be implemented. We are also of the opinion that in doing so, the contemnor O.P. had not done any willful violation of the order of the Tribunal. Therefore, we accept the contention of Mr. S. N. Ray and accept the order annexed at page 5 of the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner as compliance report and accordingly, drop the proceeding." ;