Dismissed¶32

J. Prema Anitha v. P.a.Naresh and 3 others

Madras HC14 Feb 2025CONT P/178/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court contempt jurisdiction: a direction to 'consider' an approval proposal is not a positive direction to grant approval; rejection of the proposal, even on erroneous grounds, does not amount to willful disobedience and cannot found a contempt action. Keywords: Cont.P.No.178 of 2025; Section 11 Contempt of Courts Act; W.A.No.2599 of 2024 dated 29.08.2024; approval of appointment; Danish Mission Elementary School; Director of Elementary Education; District Educational Officer (Elementary); Block Educational Officer; contempt dismissed; liberty to file fresh writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Liberty left to the petitioner to challenge the order of rejection by way of another Writ Petition. ¶32

J. Prema Anitha Vs P.a.Naresh and 3 others — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Cont.P.No.178 of 2025

¶2

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 14.02.2025

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN AND

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN

¶6

Contempt Petition No.178 of 2025

¶7

J.Prema Anitha ...Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.Dr.P.A.Naresh,

¶10

The Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.

¶11

2.Paramasivam, District Educational Officer (Elementary), Virudhachalam, Cuddalore District.

¶12

3.Ramesh, Block Educational Officer, Nallur, Cuddalore District.

¶13

4.Augustine, Correspondent, Danish Mission Elementary School, Pe.Ponnerai, Pennadam, Cuddalore District. ...Respondents

¶14

1/4

¶15

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

¶16

Cont.P.No.178 of 2025

¶17

Prayer : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, seeking to punish the respondents for willful disobedience and noncompliance of the order passed by the Court in W.A.No.2599 of 2024 dated 29.08.2024.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.S.N.Ravichandran

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.U.M.Ravichandran,

¶20

Special Government Pleader

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

(Order of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.)

¶23

Complaining that there is a willful disobedience of the order of this

¶24

Court made in W.A.No.2599 of 2024, the petitioner is before us. The operative portion of the order made in the said Writ Appeal is as follows:-

¶25

As such, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also in the light of the above judgment passed by a Division Bench of this Court, the appellants herein are directed to consider and pass an order of approval of the appointment made by the School Management, provided the said proposals satisfy the norms prescribed for such appointment and as per the Rules, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, bearing in mind the aforestated judgment.

¶26

2. After the order, the District Educational Officer (Elementary

¶27

2/4

¶28

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

¶29

Cont.P.No.178 of 2025

¶30

Education) has passed an order on 30.10.2024 rejecting the approval on various grounds.

¶31

3. The order of the Division Bench only directs the respondents therein to pass orders on the approval upon considering the application for approval on merits. There is no positive direction to grant approval. Therefore, the respondents are well within their rights to reject the approval even on wrong grounds, but the same will not provide a cause of action for contempt.

¶32

4. Hence, this Contempt Petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to challenge the order of rejection by way of another Writ Petition.

¶33

(R.S.M., J.) (G.A.M., J.) 14.02.2025

¶34

dsa Index : No Neutral Citation : No Speaking order

¶35

3/4

¶36

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

¶37

Cont.P.No.178 of 2025

¶38

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.