Disposed

C.Murugesan v. Tmt.S.Malarvizhi I.A.S.

Madras HC17 Jun 2019CONT P/767/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Contempt Petition alleging non-compliance with an order to reconsider a Community Certificate application, the Court held that the respondents rejected the application, providing the petitioner with a remedy to challenge that order rather than demanding contempt punishment.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Petition closed; petitioner held entitled to challenge the rejection order in regular proceedings.

C.Murugesan Vs Tmt.S.Malarvizhi I.A.S. — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 17.06.2019

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶7

Contempt Petition No.767 of 2019

¶8

C.Murugesan
S/o.Chinna Mogu ...Petitioner
Vs
1.S.Malarvizhi, I.A.S.,
The District Collector,
Dharmapuri District,
Dharmapuri.
2.M.P.Sivan Arul, I.A.S.,
The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District. ... Respondents

¶9

Contempt Petition filed u/s.11 of the Contempt of Courts Act praying to punish the respondents for wilfully disobeying the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.24768 of 2018 dated 22.10.2018.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Sankaran For Respondents : Mr.M.Elumalai Government Advocate ***** O R D E R [Order was delivered by R.SUBBIAH, J ]

¶11

The present Contempt Petition has been filed by petitioner alleging non-compliance of the order of this Court passed in W.P.No.24768 of 2018 dated 22.10.2018.

¶12

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Government Advocate for respondents.

¶13

¶14

This Court, under orders in W.P.No.24768 of 2018 dated 22.10.2018, set aside the impugned proceedings of the first respondent dated 28.07.2017 and remitted back the matter directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application seeking issuance of Community Certificate to his children afresh by considering the Genealogy (Family Tree) of petitioner and after examining the relationship between the petitioner and P.Kumar, P.Sakthivel, A.Perumal, K.Jeeva Anand, etc., who are said to be petitioner's relatives, by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order. This Court has also made it clear that the said order has been passed without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim made by petitioner. Since the order has not been complied with within the stipulated period, petitioner has filed the present Contempt Petition.

¶15

When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Government Advocate submits that the order of this Court has been complied with and the respondent has passed an order rejecting the petitioner's application.

¶16

On the other hand, learned counsel for petitioner

¶17

submits that this Court has specifically directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application

¶18

taking into account the Genealogy (Family Tree) of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioner and Community Certificate issued to his

¶19

¶20

relatives. However, the second respondent, without considering the same, has rejected the petitioner's application.

¶21

Considering the submissions made, this Court is of

¶22

the view that in compliance with the order of this Court, respondent has passed an order rejecting the petitioner's application. In such circumstance, the remedy for the petitioner is to challenge the said order in the manner known to law.

¶23

Accordingly, the Contempt Petition is closed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order passed by the respondent, if he so desires. SD/ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES) gm //Certified to be true copy//

¶24

Dated at Madras this the day of 2019.

¶25

COURT OFFICER(O.S.)

¶26

from 25^th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

¶27

Sm/02/07/2019

¶28

¶29

The District Collector, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.

¶30

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

¶31

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District.

C.Murugesan v. Tmt.S.Malarvizhi I.A.S.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Murugesan v. Tmt.S.Malarvizhi I.A.S.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Selvakumar, Vs The District Revenue Officer

Arumugham Vs The Inspector of Police

Saraswathi Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

P.Arumugam Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

R.Janarthanan@Gandhi Vs The District Collector

T.Jayasudha Vs Thiru G.Punniyakotti