Dismissed

Mr. Muthu v. Mr. a. Karthik

Madras HC13 Nov 2018SUB A(MD)/139/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner applied to reopen contempt proceedings for non-compliance with a court order. The Court observed that the respondents had complied with the directions before by the time of the application. Consequently, the sub-application to reopen the contempt petition was closed without further orders.

What did the court decide?

The sub-application to reopen the contempt proceedings is closed.

Mr. Muthu Vs Mr. a. Karthik — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )

¶3

Tuesday, the Thirteenth day of November Two Thousand and Eighteen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice K.K.SASIDHARAN and The Hon'ble Mr.Justice P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

¶6

SUB A(MD) No.139 of 2017

¶7

¶8

CONT P(MD) No.281 of 2017

¶9

MUTHU S/O.MASANAM, 10, LIONS CLUB MAINS ROAD, SHANMUGAPURAM, PALANI-1. ... PETITIONER/PETITIONER

¶10

¶11

1 A.KARTHIK, I.A.S., SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,

¶12

HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, CHENNAI.

¶13

2 RAJIV RATHNOO, I.A.S., COMMISSIONER OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, CHENNAI-25.

¶14

3 R.KANDASAMY

¶15

PRINCIPAL, ARULMIGU PALANI ANDAVAR

¶16

POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE,

¶17

PALANI, DINDIGUL DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENTS

¶18

Prayer in SUB A(MD) No.139 of 2017:

¶19

Filed under Section 151 of CPC., prayed this Hon'ble Court to reopen the contempt proceedings in Cont.P.No.281 of 2017.

¶20

Prayer in CONT P(MD)No.281 of 2017 :

¶21

Filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Acts prayed this Hon'ble Court to punish the respondents for his wilful disobedience of the said order passed in WA.No.23 of 2012 dated 22/04/2016.

¶22

Prayer in WA(MD)No. 23 of 2012 :

¶23

Filed under Section 15 of Letters Patent prayed this Hon'ble Court, to set aside the order passed in W.P(MD)No.13898 of 2011 dated 07.12.2011.

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶25

Prayer in WP(MD)No.13898 of 2011 :

¶26

Filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, prayed

¶27

¶28

this Hon'ble Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to promote the Petitioner as instructor in Civil Engineering in the 3rd respondent college, by considering his representation dated 12.09.2011.

¶29

ORDER : This Petition coming on for hearing on this day upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof, upon hearing the arguments of Mr.S.C.HEROLD SINGH, counsel for petitioner and Mrs.S.SRIMATHY, Special Government Pleader for Respondents this Court made the following order:-

¶30

[Order of the Court was made by K.K.SASIDHARAN,J.]

¶31

Since there was no compliance of the orders passed by this Court, the petitioner filed this application to reopen the contempt petition. During the currency of the said application, the respondents have complied with the direction issued by this Court.

¶32

In view of the subsequent events relating the compliance of the orders passed by this Court, this sub-application is closed.

¶33

Sd/Assistant Registrar ()

¶34

/True Copy/

¶35

Sub Assistant Registrar (CS-)

¶36

¶37

1 A.KARTHIK, I.A.S., SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, CHENNAI.

¶38

2 RAJIV RATHNOO, I.A.S., COMMISSIONER OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, CHENNAI-25.

¶39

3 R.KANDASAMY PRINCIPAL, ARULMIGU PALANI ANDAVAR POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, PALANI, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

¶40

- 1 CC TO Mr.S.C.HEROLD SINGH, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 95059 + 1 CC TO Mr.R.DEVARAJ, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 95341

¶41

ORDER DATED : 13.11.2018 ORDER

¶42

SUB A(MD) No.139 of 2017 IN CONT P(MD) No.281 of 2017

¶43

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ TE/SV/SAR-2 : 11/12/2018 : 2P/6C

Mr. Muthu v. Mr. a. Karthik

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Muthu v. Mr. a. Karthik

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Kalavathi, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

The State of Tamil Nadu, Vs K.Muthulakshmi

The Combined Court Advocate Vs the Bar Council of Tamilnadu

The Commissioner, Vs K.Kannaki, D/O. Krishna Pillai

P. Mariyappan, Vs the Secretary to Govt.

V. Maharajan, Vs the District Collector