This court considered a contempt petition filed against official respondents for alleged inaction and violation of a prior order dated 05.12.2016 in W.P. No. 19352 of 2012 regarding encroachment on a cart track. The court noted the matter was resolved in Civil Court.
The contempt petition was not entertained and 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.2073 of 2017
R.Srinath .. Petitioner
-vs-
1. Thiyagarajan,
The Tahsildar,
Taluk Office, Hosur,
Krishnagiri District.
2. Rajini Devi,
Village Administrative Officer,
Kelavarapalli Panchayat,
Hosur Taluk,
Krishnagiri District. .. Respondents
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.19352 of 2012, dated 05.12.2016.
For Petitioner : No Appearance For Respondent : Mr.T.N.Rajagopalan Government Pleader
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by M.Sundar, J.)
No representation on behalf of the petitioner. We
have heard the submissions of the learned Government https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
Pleader.
2
encroachment by the private respondents 4 and 5 in the writ petition on a cart track said to have been comprised in
Survey Nos.3 and 4, Kallipuram Village, Hosur Taluk.
this Court disposed of the writ petition directing the official respondents i.e., the jurisdictional Tahsildar and
the Village Administrative Officer to cause an inspection of the area concerned and take action in accordance with
law, if encroachment is found and conclude the proceedings within a time frame.
which according to the writ petitioner is a violation of the directions given by this Court in the writ petition.
Government Pleader submitted that the aforesaid official https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
respondents have inspected the aforesaid lands and found
3
that the cart track is situate in a private patta land.
inspection was conducted in the presence of the writ
petitioner as well as the private respondents 4 and 5 in the writ petition.
respondents, we are informed that the writ petitioner and the private respondents 4 and 5 agreed to have disputes, if any, in future to be settled in a Civil Court, as the cart track in question is situate in private land. Photocopies of the relevant extracts from the office File have also
been placed before us for our perusal.
for us to believe that our directions vide the order dated
05.12.2016 in W.P.No.19352 of 2012 have not been carried out.
petition.
SD/ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(O.S.I) bbr
//Certified to be true copy//
Dated at Madras this the day of 2018.
4
COURT OFFICER(O.S.)
from 25th 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.3965.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there has been willful disobedience of the Court's order by the official respondents.
Whether inaction by the respondents amounts to a violation of the previous writ petition directions.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
R. Srinath
Thiyagarajan
Rajini Devi
INDIRA BANERJEE
M. SUNDAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
