In a contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience of a prior order, the court closed the matter because the respondents had filed appeals and an interim stay was granted, rendering further proceedings unnecessary.
This Contempt Petition is 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.
Cont.P.(MD).No.1316 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 10.01.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
Cont.P.(MD).No.1316 of 2019 in W.P.(MD).No.22006 of 2018
M.Kavin Kumar ... Petitioner/Petitioner
vs.
1.Mr.K.Nanthakumar, I.A.S.,
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, represented by its Secretary, Park Town, VOC Nagar, Chennai 600 003.
2.Mr.V.Dakshinamoorthy I.A.S.,
The Director of Horticulture and Plantation Crops, O/o. The Director of Horticulture and Plantation Crops, Chepauk, Chennai -5.
... Contemnors/Respondent
PRAYER : Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to initiate contempt proceedings against the contemnors / respondents and punish them for the wilful disobedience of the order of this Court in W.P.(MD).No.22006 of 2018, dated 27.04.2019.
Prayer in WP(MD). 22006/ 2018 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a Writ of Declaration to declare the non-selection of the petitioner to the post of Assistant Horticulture Officer during the Certificate Verification held on 23.10.2018 as illegal and consequently for a direction, directing the Respondent No.1 to rectify the error in the Petitioners online application pertaining to Direct Recruitment to the Post of Assistant Horticulture of Officer by way of changing the Petitioners Community Status as DNC instead of BC and consider the Petitioner in the DNC Category and appoint the petitioner in the post of Assistant Horticulture Officer, within the time stipulated by this Court.
1/3
Cont.P.(MD).No.1316 of 2019
For Petitioner For R1 For R2
: Mr.Aswin Rajasingh for Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy : Mr.V.Paneer Selvam : Mr.A.K.Manikkam Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
Mr.V.Paneer Selvam, learned counsel for the first respondent and Mr.A.K.Manikkam, learned Special Government Pleader for the second respondent bring to the notice of the Court that writ appeals bearing Nos.555 and 556 of 2020 have been filed by the respondents, challenging the order of the learned single Judge dated 27.04.2019, in respect of which contempt is alleged and the Division Bench has granted interim stay of the order of the learned single Judge, on 17.08.2020. Thus, I see no purpose to be served in keeping this contempt petition pending any longer.
// True Copy //
akv
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate / litigant concerned.
To
1.Mr.K.Nanthakumar, I.A.S., The Secretary Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Park Town, VOC Nagar, Chennai 600 003.
2.Mr.V.Dakshinamoorthy I.A.S.,
The Director of Horticulture and Plantation Crops, O/o. The Director of Horticulture and Plantation Crops, Chepauk, Chennai -5.
2/3
Cont.P.(MD).No.1316 of 2019
+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-1313[F] dated 11/01/2022 )
+1 CC to M/s.V.PANNEER SELVAM, Advocate ( SR-1435[F] dated 12/01/2022 )
Cont.P.(MD).No.1316 of 2019 10.01.2022
SK(CO) KB(01.02.2022) 3P 5C
3/3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to keep the contempt petition pending when writ appeals challenging the impugned order have been filed?
What is the appropriate course of action in the presence of an interim stay granted by the Division Bench?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M.Kavin Kumar
Mr.K.Nanthakumar, I.A.S.
Mr.V.Dakshinamoorthy I.A.S.
Anita Sumanth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
