Contempt petition challenging denial of promotion despite assurances in original writ petition. Court found prior order complied with, no contempt committed, and dismissed the petition.
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 : 18.04.2018
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
Contempt Petition No.252 of 2018
Tmt.C.Srividhya ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. Dr.C.Chandramouli, I.A.S., Secretary
State of Tamil Nadu,
Commercial Taxes Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai – 9.
2. Dr.C.Chandramouli, I.A.S.,
The Addl.Chief Secretary/The Commissioner,
Commercial Taxes Department,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – 5.
... Respondents
Prayer : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondents for the willful disobedience of the orders of this Hon'ble Court passed in W.P.No.21303 of 2017 dated 22.08.2017 under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act
For Petitioners : M/s.S.Doraisami
For Respondent : Mr.M.Elumalai, GA
2
O R D E R
The present contempt petition is filed seeking
implementation of the order dated 22.08.2017 passed in W.P.No.21303 of 2017.
2.The learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of
the writ petitioner states that the respondents had included the name of the petitioner in the panel for promotion and further, gave an undertaking that the case of the writ petitioner would be considered at the time of grant of promotion in accordance with the seniority. The learned Senior Advocate is of an opinion that in violation of the undertaking given by the respondents, now an order has been passed, denying promotion to the writ petitioner
in proceedings dated 21.11.2017. Thus, the respondents have committed Contempt of Court.
3.The learned Government Advocate appearing on
behalf of the respondents state that this Court passed an order on 22.08.2017 in W.P.No.21303 of 2017, directing the
first respondent to consider the representation submitted
by the writ petitioner on 07.07.2017 and pass orders on
merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Accordingly, the 1st respondent considered the case of the
writ petitioner and passed an order in Letter
3
No.12257/A1/2017-1, dated 21.11.2017. Thus, the order of the Hon'ble High Court has been complied with and if any grievances exists to the writ petitioner, it is left open to the writ petitioner to agitate the same in the manner known to law.
demerits of the case of the writ petitioner was adjudicated and a finding was given. Therefore, the 1st respondent in compliance with the order of this Court passed an order in proceedings dated 21.11.2017 and if at all, the writ
petitioner is aggrieved from and out of the order, then it is left open to the petitioner to redress his grievances in the manner known to law. Thus, the respondents have not committed any Contempt of Court, warranting any further actions in the hands of this Court.
4
5.Accordingly, the contempt petition stands dismissed. However, there is no order as to costs.
SD/ ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(Commr,Cases) kak
//Certified to be true copy//
Dated at Madras this the day of 2018.
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/21/05/2018.
One CC to Government Pleader, SR.6400.
One CC to M/s. Doraisamy, Advocate, SR.6328.
To.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Commercial Taxes Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai – 9.
2. The Addl.Chief Secretary/The Commissioner,
Commercial Taxes Department,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – 5.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether respondents committed contempt of court by denying promotion in violation of a guarantee given during earlier writ proceedings.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Tmt.C.Srividhya
Dr.C.Chandramouli, I.A.S.
S.M. Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
