M.Kannan v. Ponmudi
Case brief
What is this about?
In a contempt petition regarding disobedience of a writ order on pay revision and retirement benefits, the court found that the respondents had complied with the payment obligations and closed the petition without imposing punishment.
What did the court decide?
Contempt Petition closed without imposing punishment on the respondents.
What the court decided
Cont.P.(MD).No.923 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 03.01.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
Cont.P.(MD).No.923 of 2019 in W.P.(MD).No.16034 of 2018
M.Kannan ... Petitioner/ Petitioner
vs.
1.Mr.Ponmudi, Managing Director, The Management of Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited, Kumbakonam.
2.Mr.K.Gunasekaran (in-charge), General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited, Karaikudi Region, Karaikudi.
3.Mr.Venkatarajan, Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai -2.
... Respondents/ Contemnors
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
M. Kannan
- respondent
Mr. Ponmudi
- respondent
Mr. K. Gunasekaran
- respondent
Mr. Venkatarajan
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court