Dismissed

A.Vasu v. Gnanasekaran, I.A.S.

Madras HC1 Jul 2022CONT P(MD)/719/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a contempt petition alleging disobedience of a previous writ order. The respondents submitted that a writ appeal against the impugned order was already pending. The court held that parallel adjudication was inappropriate and closed the contempt petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to pursue remedies subject to the appeal's outcome.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Petition stands closed; Petitioner granted liberty to work out remedies subject to outcome of writ appeal.

A.Vasu Vs Gnanasekaran, I.A.S. — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

CONT.P(MD).No.719 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 01.07.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

¶6

CONT.P(MD).No.719 of 2022

A.Vasu

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.Gnansekaran, I.A.S., The Director, Animal Husbandry and Medicine, Door No.571, Anna Salai, Nandhanam, Chennai-600 035.

¶11

2.Dr.Nataraj Kumar, The Regional Joint Director, Animal Husbandry Department, Near Gandhi Museum, Madurai-625 020.

¶12

3.Dr.S.M.Saravanan, The Assistant Director, Animal Husbandry Department, Oomachikulam, Madurai.

¶13

...Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, to punish the respondents for having willfully and

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

CONT.P(MD).No.719 of 2022

¶18

deliberately disobeyed the orders of this Court passed in W.P(MD).No. 23735 of 2019 dated 27.01.2022.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Juliet Latha For Respondents : Mrs.D.Farjana Ghoushia Special Government Pleader

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

It is stated by the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents that as against the order of the Writ Court, an appeal in W.A.(MD)No.598 of 2022 has been preferred by the respondents before this Court and the order has been reserved in the writ appeal. While that being so, it would not be appropriate to parallely adjudicate the present contempt proceedings.

¶22

2. Hence, this Contempt Petition stands closed. The petitioner is granted liberty, to work out his remedies, subject to the outcome of the writ appeal.

¶23

01.07.2022

¶24

Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order ssb

¶25

2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

CONT.P(MD).No.719 of 2022

¶27

¶28

1.The Director, Animal Husbandry and Medicine, Door No.571, Anna Salai, Nandhanam, Chennai-600 035.

¶29

2.The Regional Joint Director, Animal Husbandry Department, Near Gandhi Museum, Madurai-625 020.

¶30

3.The Assistant Director, Animal Husbandry Department, Oomachikulam,

¶31

Madurai.

¶32

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

CONT.P(MD).No.719 of 2022

¶34

M.S.RAMESH,J.

¶35

ssb

¶36

CONT.P(MD).No.719 of 2022

¶37

01.07.2022

¶38

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.Vasu v. Gnanasekaran, I.A.S.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Vasu v. Gnanasekaran, I.A.S.

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

Marimuthu .M Vs State of Tamil Nadu

N.Paranjothi, Vs Ponmudi

R.Gunasekaran Vs B. Dharmendra Pratab Yadav, I.A.S.

A.Masanam Vs Gnansekaran,I.a.S.

V. Ilango, Vs Gnanasekaran, I.A.S.

S.M.Mariappan Vs Thiruvambalam Pillai