Disposed¶37

P.Selvaraj v. Dr.R.Brindha Devi and 4 others

Madras HC10 Oct 2025CONT P/1999/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; CONT P NO. 1999 of 2024 in W.P.No.3383 of 2024; contempt petition closed 10-10-2025; Justice V. Lakshminarayanan; Section 11 Contempt of Courts Act 1971; wilful disobedience of writ order dated 16.02.2024; road kept open; road obstruction by stones and boulders; encroachment; Mecheri/Mettur, Salem District; petitioner P.Selvaraj; counsel V.Elangovan; Govt. Advocate S.J.Mohamed Sathik; BDO R.Revathy; Tahsildar S.Ramesh; petitioner may work out rights in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

No punitive sanction imposed; the contempt petition was closed after the road was shown clear, with the BDO directed to keep the road free from encroachment and the petitioner left free to work out his rights in accordance with law. ¶37

P.Selvaraj Vs Dr.R.Brindha Devi and 4 others — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents committed wilful disobedience of the orders of this Court passed in W.P.No.3383 of 2024 dated 16.02.2024, warranting punishment under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act. +1 more

¶18

Court's answer

Since the road has been cleared and compliance achieved, the Court closed the contempt petition rather than punishing the respondents.

¶37

Ratio / Principle

On the same-day photographs produced by the Block Development Officer showing the road clear of any obstruction, the Court directed that, in terms of its order, the Block Development Officer shall ensure the road is kept free from any encroachment.

¶35

Key takeaways

If the petitioner still has any grievance, he may work out his rights in accordance with law.obiter¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Madras (The Honourable Mr.Justice V. Lakshminarayanan), 10-10-2025: Contempt Petition No. 1999 of 2024 filed in W.P.No.3383 of 2024 by P.Selvaraj under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish five Salem District officials - Dr.R.Brindha Devi (District Collector), Tmt.Ponnumani (Revenue Divisional Officer, Mettur), Thiru.Manivasagam (Block Development Officer, Mecheri), Tmt.Viji (Tahsildar, Mettur) and Thiru.Mahendiran (Inspector of Police, Mecheri) - for alleged wilful disobedience of the Court's orders in W.P.No.3383 of 2024 dated 16.02.2024 directing that a road be kept open. At the hearing, Ms.R.Revathy (Block Development Officer, Mecheri) and Mr.S.Ramesh (Tashildar, Mettur) attended in obedience to the Court's order of 12.09.2025; the respondents/contemnors stated they had already passed an order directing that the road be kept open. Counsel for the petitioner (Mr.V.Elangovan) alleged the road had been re-blocked with stones and boulders the very next day after clearing and produced photographs; the BDO stated these were old pictures and produced same-day photographs showing the road clear of any obstruction. The Court accordingly directed the Block Development Officer to ensure the road is kept free from any encroachment, closed the contempt petition, and observed that the petitioner may work out his rights in accordance with law in case of any grievance. Respondents' side represented by Mr.S.J.Mohamed Sathik, Govt. Advocate.

¶1

CONT P NO. 1999 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 10-10-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

CONT P NO. 1999 of 2024

¶7

¶8

W.P.No.3383 of 2024

¶9

P.Selvaraj

¶10

Petitioner

¶11

1.Dr.R.Brindha Devi, I.A.S The District Collector, Salem District, Salem.

¶12

2.Tmt.Ponnumani

¶13

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mettur, Salem District.

¶14

3.Thiru.Manivasagam The Block Development Officer, Mecheri Block Development Office, Mettur Taluk, Salem District.

¶15

4.Tmt.Viji The Tahsildar, Mettur, Salem District.

¶16

5.Thiru.Mahendiran The Inspector of Police, Mecheri Police Station, Salem District.

¶17

Respondents

¶18

PRAYER: The contempt petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondents for the wilful disobedience of the orders of this Court passed in W.P.No.3383 of 2024 dated 16.02.2024 under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act.

¶19

1/4

¶20

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

¶21

CONT P NO. 1999 of 2024

¶22

For petitioner ... Mr.V.Elangovan for Respondents ... Mr.Mr.S.J.Mohamed Sathik Govt. Advocate

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Ms.R.Revathy, Block Development Officer, Mecheri Block

¶25

Development Office, Mettur Taluk, Salem District and Mr.S.Ramesh, Tashildar, Mettur, Salem District are present in Court.

¶26

2.This is in obedience to the order passed by this Court on 12.09.2025. According to the respondents/contemnors, they have already

¶27

passed an order on 12.09.2025 directing that the road be kept open.

¶28

3.Mr.V.Elangovan, learned counsel appearing for the contempt

¶29

petitioner states that after the road had been cleared, on the very next day, the stones and boulders had been laid, blocking the road. He has produced certain photographs.

¶30

4.Ms.R.Revathy, Block Development Officer, who is present, on

¶31

perusing the photographs, states that these are old pictures and do not represent the present day status. She has produced the photographs taken 2/4

¶32

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

¶33

CONT P NO. 1999 of 2024

¶34

today, which show that the road is clear of any obstruction. In terms of the

¶35

order, the Block Development Officer shall ensure the road is kept free