The Single Bench held that the prior order did not specifically direct the grant of ex-gratia amount. Consequently, the Court found no ground to reopen the closed contempt petition. The petitioner was advised to proceed separately against the order dated 05.04.2022.
The sub-application was closed. No order reopening the contempt petition.
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.
Sub.Appln.No.269 of 2023 in Cont.P.No.1641 of 2022
Sub.Appln.No.269 of 2023 in Cont.P.No.1641 of 2022
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
The present sub application is filed seeking to re-open the Contempt Petition No.1641 of 2022, which was closed on 14.10.2022.
which reveals that, this Court, vide order dated 28.10.2021 made in W.P.No.23193 of 2021 directed the fourth respondent therein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.03.2021 based on the letter of the third respondent, dated 05.09.2019 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law. However, as the same was not complied with
by the fourth respondent, the petitioner filed a contempt petition in Contempt Petition No.1641 of 2022 and the same was closed on 14.10.2022 based on the Status report dated 11.10.2022 filed by the respondent/contemnor, in which, it is stated that, the petitioner's representation was considered and orders were passed on 03.03.2022. However, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that, no orders were passed on her representation on 03.03.2022 and no exgratia
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.1 of 4
Sub.Appln.No.269 of 2023 in Cont.P.No.1641 of 2022
amount was granted in her favour, which led to filing of this Sub application.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.2 of 4
Sub.Appln.No.269 of 2023 in Cont.P.No.1641 of 2022
the contempt petition. Accordingly, the sub application is closed. However, it is open to the petitioner to proceed in accordance with law against the order dated 05.04.2022, if so advised.
21.04.2023
Index : Yes/No Speaking Order/ Non-speaking order sp
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.3 of 4
Sub.Appln.No.269 of 2023 in Cont.P.No.1641 of 2022
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
sp
Sub.Appln.No.269 of 2023 in Cont.P.No.1641 of 2022
21.04.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.4 of 4
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition (closed earlier) should be re-opened given the petitioner's claim that ex-gratia amount was not granted despite recommendations.
Whether the prior judgment in W.P.No.23193 of 2021 specifically directed the grant of ex-gratia amount to the petitioner.
Whether proceedings against the order dated 05.04.2022 by the Fifth Respondent should be pursued separately.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
Respondent/Contemnor
Fifth Respondent of W.P.No.23193 of 2021
M.DHANDAPANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
