The High Court of Madras considered a contempt petition alleging violation of a January 2017 order. The respondent Government Pleader submitted that compliance with court directions had occurred. Finding no grounds for contempt, the Court rejected the petition as closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.03.2018
CORAM :
The Hon'ble MS.INDIRA BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR Contempt Petition No.1969 of 2017 S.P.Prabhu .. Petitioner -vsK.Venkadasan, Tahsildar, Chinnasalem Taluk Office, Chinnasalem Taluk, Villupuram District. .. Respondent
Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondent for willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.2068 of 2017 dated 30.01.2017. For Petitioner : Ms.M.Panimalar For Respondent : Mr.T.N.Rajagopalan Government Pleader O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by M.Sundar, J. )
This contempt petition has been filed by the writ petitioner in W.P.No.2068 of 2017 alleging violation of an order dated 30.01.2017 made in the writ petition.
2
Tahsildar, Chinnasalem Taluk is the lone respondent in this contempt petition.
representing the lone respondent in this contempt petition https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ submitted that an inspection has in fact been done as per
the order/directions of the aforesaid order of this Court
3
dated 30.01.2017. It is further submitted that with regard to Survey Nos.31/2 and 34/1, one is a Odai and the other is a patta land. To be noted, Survey No.31/2 is Odai, we are informed.
Government Pleader that in the inspection, both the writ petitioner and respondent No.5 in the writ petition were found to be encroachers in the Odai.
/ removal of encroachments have been initiated and photocopies of relevant proceedings from the File have also been placed before us.
action taken, the petitioner in this contempt petition i.e., Mr.S.P.Prabhu has moved this Court by way of filing a writ petition being W.P.No.27353 of 2017 assailing the notice issued under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. The aforesaid
writ petition (W.P.No.27353 of 2017) has been disposed
of by another Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court vide a order dated 25.10.2017 and the operative
portion is contained in paragraph 7, which reads as follows:
4
“7. In the light of the effective alternate remedy available, the petitioner is at liberty to submit an appeal by invoking section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 along with the relevant and authenticated documents to the 1st respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with the petition for stay and if the papers are otherwise in order, the 1st respondent or his delegated official, shall entertain the appeal and the said official (or) the delegated official, is at option, either to take up the petition for stay and give a disposal within a period of two weeks thereafter or take up the main appeal itself and give a disposal on merits and in accordance with law within a further period of eight weeks thereafter and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner and till such time, the 4th respondent shall defer further proceedings in terms of the impugned notice issued under section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, dated 11.09.2017.”
lone respondent in this contempt petition before us has complied with the directions issued vide order dated https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 30.01.2017 in W.P.No.2098 of 2017.
5
petition.
SD/-
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(O.S.I)
bbr
//Certified to be true copy//
Dated at Madras this the day of 2018.
COURT OFFICER(O.S.)
from 25 th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing
Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this
format.
CO/10/04/2018
one cc to the Government Pleader,SR.No.3966.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition filed for willful disobedience of the order passed in W.P.No.2068 of 2017 should be entertained.
Whether the respondent has complied with the directions issued in the underlying writ petition.
S.P. Prabhu
K. Venkadasan
Ms. Indira Banerjee
Mr. Justice M. Sundar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
