Disposed

S.Seenan v. Thiru.J.Radhakrishnan IAS

Madras HC20 Mar 2024CONT P/584/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition alleging non-compliance of an order directing consideration of the petitioner for promotion to Lighting Inspector. The respondents considered his representation but rejected it after the Commissioner of Employment and Training certified that his Wireman Helper Competency Certificate was not equivalent to ITI Wireman Examination. The court held the order was duly complied with and

What the court decided

AI extract

S.Seenan Vs Thiru.J.Radhakrishnan IAS — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Cont.P.No.584 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 20.03.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

Cont.P.No. 584 of 2024

S.Seenan

... Petitioner

Vs.

J.Radhakrishnan, IAS, Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai – 600 003.

¶11

K.Vijayakumar Superintending Engineer (Electrical), Greater Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Building, Chennai – 600 003.

¶12

... Respondents

¶13

Prayer:- Contempt petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, praying to punish the first and second respondents for willful disobedience of the order passed in W.P.No.18179 of 2011 on 15.09.2023 by this Court.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Sundaravadanam For Respondents : Mr.G.T.Subramanian Standing Counsel

¶15

Page 1 of 4

¶16

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

¶17

Cont.P.No.584 of 2024

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The Contempt Petition has been filed to punish the respondents

¶20

for non compliance of the order dated 15.09.2023, passed by this Court in W.P.No.18179 of 2011, thereby directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's request and to include him in the panel for promotion to the post of Lighting Inspector.

¶21

The petitioner has produced his Wireman Helper Competency Certificate issued by the Government ITI along with SSLC certificate. As directed by this Court, the respondents considered the petitioner's representation and first respondent has sent a communication dated 14.03.2024, thereby rejecting the request made by the petitioner.

¶22

On perusal of the communication dated 14.03.2024 revealed that, it was directed to verify whether the Wireman Helper Competency Certificate is equivalent to ITI Wireman Examination, to the Commissioner, Employment and Training, Gunidy. The Commissioner issued certificate that Wireman Helper Competency Certificate is not equivalent to ITI Wireman Examination. Therefore, the request made by the petitioner was not

¶23

Page 2 of 4

¶24

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

¶25

Cont.P.No.584 of 2024

¶26

considered.

¶27

In view of the above, the order passed by this Court was duly complied with by the respondents and this Contempt Petition is closed. However, if the petitioner aggrieved over the above order, he can challenge the same, if so advised.

¶28

20.03.2024

¶29

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

¶30

rts

¶31

¶32

The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai – 600 003.

¶33

The Superintending Engineer (Electrical), Greater Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Building, Chennai – 600 003.

¶34

Page 3 of 4

¶35

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

¶36

Cont.P.No.584 of 2024

¶37

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

¶38

rts

¶39

Cont.P.No. 584 of 2024

¶40

20.03.2024

¶41

Page 4 of 4

¶42

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

S.Seenan v. Thiru.J.Radhakrishnan IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

S.Seenan v. Thiru.J.Radhakrishnan IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Divisional Railway Manager Vs the Chief Commissioner for Persons With Disabilities

Prof.Dr.M.Lakshmi Vs the Secretary to Government

Prof.Dr.N.Sumathi Vs the Secretary to Government

State of Tamilnadu Vs R.Chinnasamy

D.Chandra Mohan Vs the Managing Director

S.Rajakumar Vs The State of TamilNadu