Dismissed

S.Rejani v. C.Marimuthu

Madras HC18 Oct 2024CONT P(MD)/264/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt petition for non-compliance of a dated 20.10.2023 order directing appointment and salary arrears, the Court closed the petition as the respondent was given time by a division bench judgment and was willing to comply. Liberty to revive remains.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition closed; liberty granted to revive in case of non-compliance with the Division Bench order dated 23.09.2024.

S.Rejani Vs C.Marimuthu — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Cont.P.(MD) No.264 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 18.10.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶6

Cont.P.(MD) No.264 of 2024 in W.P.(MD) No.16143 of 2016

S.Rejani

... Petitioner

-vs-

C.Marimuthu District Educational Officer Marthandam Educational District Marthandam, Kanyakumari District then District Educational Officer Kuzhithurai-629 165 Kanyakumari District ... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the respondent herein for his deliberate and willful disobedience of the order of this Court, dated 20.10.2023 in W.P. (MD) No.16143 of 2016.

¶12

Page 1 of 5

¶13

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

¶14

Cont.P.(MD) No.264 of 2024

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Ragatheesh Kumar For Respondent : Mr.T.Amjad Khan Government Advocate

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This contempt petition has been filed for the alleged disobedience of the order dated 20.10.2023, passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.16143 of 2016.

¶18

2. This Court, in the aforesaid order, directed the respondents therein to grant approval for the appointment of the petitioner with effect from 04.12.2007 as a Teacher in T.C.K.Higher Secondary School, Padandalumoodu, Kanyakumari District, and grant all eligible amounts of arrears of salary to the petitioner, within one month from the date of the said order, apart from the monthly salary and future amounts on the said date.

¶19

3. It is now brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent that the respondents in the said writ petition had preferred a writ appeal aggrieved by the order dated 20.10.2023, passed in W.P.(MD) No.16143 of 2016 and in the said writ appeal,

¶20

Page 2 of 5

¶21

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

¶22

Cont.P.(MD) No.264 of 2024

¶23

the Honourable Division Bench of this Court by its order dated 23.09.2024 passed in W.A.(MD) No.1612 of 2024, upheld the order of the learned Single Judge by dismissing the writ appeal, however, granted eight more weeks' time from the date of receipt of a copy of the said Judgment in the said writ appeal for the respondents therein to give effect to the order of the learned Single Judge. He would submit that the said eight weeks period is yet to get over and this contempt petition may be closed, as the respondent herein is willing to comply with the order of the Honourable Division Bench of this Court as stipulated in its Judgment.

¶24

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner is also aware of the same.

¶25

5. Since the time period for complying with the directions of the learned Single Judge, dated 20.10.2023, in W.P.(MD) No.16143 of 2016 has been extended by the Honourable Division Bench of this Court, this contempt petition is closed by directing the respondent herein to strictly comply with the directions issued by the Honourable Division Bench of this Court on 23.09.2024 passed in W.A.(MD) No.1612 of 2024, within the time stipulated by the Honourable Division Bench of this Court. Liberty is also granted to the

¶26

Page 3 of 5

¶27

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

¶28

Cont.P.(MD) No.264 of 2024

¶29

petitioner to revive this contempt petition in the event of the respondent not complying with the directions of the Honourable Division Bench of this Court, dated 23.09.2024 issued in W.A.(MD) No.1612 of 2024.

¶30

18.10.2024

¶31

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No

¶32

krk

¶33

To: Mr.C.Marimuthu, District Educational Officer, Marthandam Educational District, Marthandam, Kanyakumari District. then District Educational Officer, Kuzhithurai-629 165, Kanyakumari District.

¶34

_____________ Page 4 of 5_

¶35

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

¶36

Cont.P.(MD) No.264 of 2024

¶37

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

¶38

krk

¶39

Cont.P.(MD) No.264 of 2024 in W.P.(MD) No.16143 of 2016

¶40

18.10.2024

¶41

Page 5 of 5

¶42

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

S.Rejani v. C.Marimuthu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Rejani v. C.Marimuthu

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

D.Priya Vs the Commissioner

U.Vimala, W/O.Lawrence Durai Vs the Director General of Police

S.M.Padmavathi, Vs the Joint Director of School

Dr.v.Ramakrishnan, Vs the Chief Educational Officer

N. Srinivasan Vs the Inspector General of

G. Selvaraj Vs Pradeep Kumar