Dismissed

A.Joseph, v. Mr.S.Karunanithi

Madras HC20 Jul 2022CONT P(MD)/387/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a contempt petition filed by a teacher against a District Educational Officer. The Court held that since the impugned order refusing pay escalation was passed pursuant to liberty granted by a Division Bench to consider the Tamil Nadu Revised Pay Rules, 2017, the disobedience could not be termed willful. The petitioner was granted liberty to challenge the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 20.07.2022 refusing to step up pay.

A.Joseph, Vs Mr.S.Karunanithi — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Cont.P.(MD)No.387 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 20.07.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶6

Cont.P.(MD)No.387 of 2020

¶7

A.Joesph ... Petitioner/Petitioner

¶8

/vs./

¶9

S.Karunanithi, District Educational Officer, Paramakudi Educational District, Ramanathapuram District. ... Contemnor/Respondent

¶10

PRAYER : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for disobeying and defying the order dated 18.03.2019 passed in WP(MD)No.24553 of 2018, on the file of this Court in accordance with law.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarthanan For Contemnor : Mr.A.Kannan

¶12

Additional Government Pleader

¶13

1/4

¶14

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

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Cont.P.(MD)No.387 of 2020

¶17

While the order of the Writ Court was challenged in W.A.(MD)No.1258 of 2020, a Division Bench of this Court, though did not interfere with the order of a learned Single Judge, had granted liberty to the respondents to consider the case of the Teacher, based on the Tamil Nadu Revised Pay Rules, 2017, in accordance with law. Consequently, the respondent has passed an order dated 20.07.2022 in Na.Ka.No.7719/Aa4/2018, refusing to step up the petitioner's pay on par with his junior.

¶18

2. In this background, since the present order dated 20.07.2022 is passed pursuant to the liberty granted by the Division Bench of this Court, I am of the view that the disobedience alleged cannot be termed to be willful in nature. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved, liberty is granted to him to challenge the order dated 20.07.2022 passed by the respondent in Na.Ka.No.7719/Aa4/2018, in accordance with law.

¶19

2/4

¶20

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

¶21

Cont.P.(MD)No.387 of 2020

¶22

3. With the above liberty, this Contempt Petition stands dismissed.

¶23

20.07.2022

¶24

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No sm

¶25

TO:

¶26

S.Karunanithi, District Educational Officer, Paramakudi Educational District, Ramanathapuram District.

¶27

3/4

¶28

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

¶29

Cont.P.(MD)No.387 of 2020

¶30

M.S.RAMESH, J.

¶31

¶32

Order made in Cont.P.(MD)No.387 of 2020

¶33

Dated: 20.07.2022

¶34

4/4

¶35

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

A.Joseph, v. Mr.S.Karunanithi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Joseph, v. Mr.S.Karunanithi

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

N.Venkateshwaran, Vs the Commissioner

K.Selvaraj, S/O.Kasi, Vs the Additional Chief Secretary

Rajarajan S Vs The Additional Chief Secretary

R.Kaliyanandi Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

S.Esakkimuthu Vs the Principal Secretary to Govt.

The Secretary Vs the State of Tamilnadu