Disposed

Nari Akbar Basha v. Faritha Banu

Madras HC9 Dec 2022CONT P/2558/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt petition, the petitioner challenged the lack of election due to non-receipt of nominations including his own. The Court noted the respondents submission regarding the election schedule and closed the petition with liberty to re-agitate the issue if it arises in the future.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition closed with liberty to file a petition to re-agitate the issue if it arises in the future.

Nari Akbar Basha Vs Faritha Banu — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Cont.P.No.2558 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09.12.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

¶6

Contempt Petition No.2558 of 2022

¶7

Nari Akbar Basha ... Petitioner

¶8

¶9

1.Mrs.Faritha Banu Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, No.1, Jaffar Syrang Street, Seethakathi Nagar, Chennai – 600 001.

¶10

2.Mrs.Aayeesha Begum Vellore Zonal Superintendent, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, No.8, Bhadur Shah Masjid Arni Road, Sayeenathapuram, Vellore – 632 001. ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer: Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the respondents for violating the order of this Court dated 19.04.2021 passed in Contempt Petition No.314 of 2020 by sending them to jail.

¶12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶13

1/4

¶14

Cont.P.No.2558 of 2022

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Ram Prasath

¶16

For Respondents : Mr.V.Lakshmi Narayanan Standing Counsel

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This contempt petition has been filed for the alleged disobedience

¶19

of the orders passed by this Court dated 1 9.04.2021 in Contempt Petition No.314 of 2021.

¶20

When this contempt petition is taken up for hearing Mr.V.Lakshmi Narayanan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents on instruction would submit that, as directed by this Court to conduct election for electing the members for Jamath, election notification was issued on 12.07.202, nomination was to be received before 19.07.2022 and election was to be held on 07.08.2022.

¶21

Despite the schedule having been issued, there was no

¶22

nomination including the petitioner to conduct the election, therefore the respondents could not conduct the election.

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

2/4

¶25

Cont.P.No.2558 of 2022

¶26

In view of the said submission made by the learned Standing

¶27

Counsel appearing for the respondents, having recorded the same, this Court feels that the contempt petition, for the time being, can be closed with a liberty to the petitioner to file a petition to re-agitate the issue if any such situation arises in future.

¶28

Accordingly, this Contempt Petition is closed.

¶29

09.12.2022

¶30

Index : Yes / No

¶31

Speaking Order : Yes / No

¶32

Sgl

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

3/4

¶35

Cont.P.No.2558 of 2022

¶36

R. SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶37

Sgl

¶38

Contempt Petition No.2558 of 2022

¶39

09.12.2022

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

4/4

Nari Akbar Basha v. Faritha Banu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nari Akbar Basha v. Faritha Banu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

E.Purushothaman Vs The Inspector General of Registration

K.Subramaniam Vs The Arbitrator

Kanchana Vs The Arbitrator and District Collector

A.Prabha Kumari Vs Tmt. Kakarla Usha, IAS

Sushil Kapoor Vs Inspector General of Registration

S.Subashchand Vs The District Revenue Officer/Revisional Authority