Anitha Alagesan, v. Mr. S.Sivarasu, I.a.S., and 2 others

Madras HC26 Nov 2024CONT P/3323/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitions filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act were taken up for hearing. The court closed the contempt petition after the Special Government Pleader produced a report stating that the representation regarding storm water drain construction was considered and submitted for funds, with project completion estimated within three weeks. A subsequent collegium note corrected the tim

What did the court decide?

The contempt petition was closed following the respondent's submission and the court's acceptance of the statement regarding project status.

Anitha Alagesan, Vs Mr. S.Sivarasu, I.a.S., and 2… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Cont.P.No.3323 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 26.11.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

¶6

Contempt Petition No.3323 of 2024

Anitha Alagesan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.S.Sivarasu, I.A.S., The Director of Municipal Administration, MRC Nagar, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 004.

¶11

2.Dr.T.Prabhushankar, I.A.S., The Distirct Collector, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur – 602 001.

¶12

3.N.Arul, The Commissioner, Thiruninravur Municipality, Thiruvallur District – 602 024.

¶13

... Respondent

¶14

PRAYER: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, praying to punish the respondents herein for willful disobedience and non-compliance of the orders of this Court made in

¶15

1/6

¶16

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

¶17

Cont.P.No.3323 of 2024

¶18

W.P.No.21468 of 2023, dated 23.08.2023 under the Provisions of Contempt of Courts Act.

¶19

For Petitioners : M/s.A.Devanathan For Respondents : Dr.T.Seenivasan Special Government Pleader

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has produced the order passed by the 3^rd respondent dated 25.11.2024, wherein he has stated that the representation of the petitioner has been considered and report has been prepared for construction of storm water drain and the same has been submitted before the Government for sanction of necessary funds.

¶22

It is also stated by the 3^rd respondent, the entire project will

¶23

be completed within a period of three weeks. The said statement made by the learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent is recorded.

¶24

2/6

¶25

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

¶26

Cont.P.No.3323 of 2024

¶27

Recording the said statement, this Contempt Petition is

¶28

closed.

¶29

26.11.2024

¶30

Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No ub

¶31

3/6

¶32

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

¶33

Cont.P.No.3323 of 2024

¶34

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

¶35

ub

¶36

Cont.P.No.3323 of 2024

¶37

26.11.2024

¶38

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

¶39

4/6

¶40

Cont.P.No.3323 of 2024

¶41

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

¶42

Contempt Petition No.3323 of 2024

¶43

The matter has been listed under the caption “for being mentioned” at the instance of the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶44

The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents by referring to the written instructions filed by 3^rd respondent dated 25.11.2024 submits that representation made by him that the entire project would be completed within a period of three years has been wrongly incorporated in the order as three weeks.

¶45

It is seen from the written instruction produced before Court by the respondents counsel that he was instructed to inform the Court that entire project would be completed within three years.

¶46

Therefore, the word expression “three weeks” mentioned paragraph No.2 shall be substituted as “three years”.

¶47

Registry is directed to issue fresh order copy.

¶48

05.02.2025

¶49

5/6

¶50

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

¶51

Cont.P.No.3323 of 2024

¶52

ub

¶53

S.SOUNTHAR, J. ub

¶54

Contempt Petition No.3323 of 2024

¶55

05.02.2025

¶56

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

¶57

6/6

Anitha Alagesan, v. Mr. S.Sivarasu, I.a.S., and 2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anitha Alagesan, v. Mr. S.Sivarasu, I.a.S., and 2 others

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

Ahamed Jabir Dastageer Thaika Najeem Vs Union of India

R.Natarajan Vs The District Collector

A.Parthasarathy Vs The Superintendent of Engineer

M.Settu Vs the Superintending Engineer

A.Venkatesan Vs the Commissioner

Jayanthi Pai Vs the Commissioners