Dismissed¶19

P.Subramaniam, v. Thiru. Gagandeep Singh Bedi, I.A.S.

Madras HC8 Aug 2025CONT P/2355/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Mummineni Sudheer Kumar J.; Contempt Petition No.2355 of 2025 closed; alleged non-compliance of remand order dated 18.12.2024 in W.P.No.20556 of 2012; promotion to post of 'Extension Officer'; G.O (Ms) No.180 dated 30.09.2003; respondents' order dated 01.08.2025; petitioner at Sl.No.92, panel considered only up to Sl.No.65; no violation found; liberty reserved to challenge proceedings dated 01.08.2025; no costs.

What did the court decide?

None; the contempt petition was closed as no violation was found, with liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordance with law if aggrieved by the proceedings dated 01.08.2025, and with no costs. ¶19

P.Subramaniam, Vs Thiru. Gagandeep Singh Bedi, I.A.S. — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Contempt Petition No.2355 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 08.08.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶6

Contempt Petition No.2355 of 2025

¶7

P.Subramaniam ... Petitioner(s)

¶8

Thiru Gagandeep Singh Bedi ... Respondent(s)

¶9

Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act for the non-compliance of the order dated 18.12.2024 passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.20556 of 2012

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.K.Selvaraj For Respondent(s) : Mr.V.Veluchamy, Additional Government Pleader

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

This contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of the order

¶13

dated 18.12.2024 passed in W.P.No.20556 of 2012, whereby this court remanded the matter back to the first respondent for passing fresh orders, taking into consideration G.O (Ms) No.180, dated 30.09.2003, and to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of 'Extension Officer' and

¶14

Page 1 of 4

¶15

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

¶16

Contempt Petition No.2355 of 2025

¶17

to release all consequential benefits pursuant to the relaxation granted under the benefit of the said Government Order.

¶18

Pursuant to the said order, the respondents claims to have considered the claim of the petitioner and, accordingly, passed an order bearing f/vz;/9668899-g/m/4-2025?2. dated 01.08.2025, stating that the turn of the petitioner has not come up for promotion to the post of 'Extension Officer', as the petitioner is placed at Sl.No.92 and the persons who are shown up to Sl.No.65 alone have been considered.

¶19

In the light of the above, this court does not see any violation of the order passed by this court, much less a deliberate violation. In the circumstances, this contempt petition is closed. However, it is made clear that in case if the petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings dated 01.08.2025, the petitioner is at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. No costs.

¶20

08.08.2025

¶21

skr Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order

¶22

Page 2 of 4

¶23

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

¶24

Contempt Petition No.2355 of 2025

¶25

Neutral Citation : Yes / No