Dismissed

V.Dayalan v. Thiru. v.Rajaraman, Ias., and another

Madras HC12 Sept 2025CONT P/2500/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt petition under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act alleging willful disobedience of a Writ Petition order, the Court held that the respondents had complied with the original order despite a delay. The Court ruled that no further adjudication was necessary and closed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The Contempt Petition is closed and no further adjudication is held necessary.

V.Dayalan Vs Thiru. v.Rajaraman, Ias., and another — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Cont.P.No.2500 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :12.09.2025

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR Cont.P.No.2500 of 2025

V.Dayalan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.Thiru.V.Rajaraman, I.A.S., Secretary to Government, Information and Public Relation Department, State of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.

¶9

2.Dr.R.Vaidyanathan, I.A.S., Director, Information and Public Relation Department, Government of Tamil Nadu Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.

¶10

... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER : Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondents for their willful disobedience of the order passed in the writ petition in W.P.No.15920 of 2021 dated 24.06.2022.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Nedunchezhiyan

¶13

For Respondents : Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader

¶14

Page 1 of 4

¶15

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

¶16

Cont.P.No.2500 of 2025

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This contempt petition has been filed to punish the respondents

¶19

for wilfully disobeying the order passed in W.P.No.15920 of 2021 dated

¶20

24.06.2022.

¶21

2. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, has placed before this Court a copy of the affidavit filed by the first respondent dated 12.09.2025, whereby, it is stated that the order of this Court has been complied with in its letter and spirit.

¶22

3. By stating as above, the learned Special Government Pleader has also filed into this Court a copy of the proceedings dated 18.07.2025.

¶23

4. Considering the said submission, and having regard to the fact that the first respondent had passed order dated 18.07.2025, this Court is of the view that the respondents have complied with the order of this Court, though with a delay, for which, the first respondent had expressed regret by his affidavit.

¶24

_________ Page 2 of 4

¶25

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

¶26

Cont.P.No.2500 of 2025

¶27

5. In view of the above, since the respondents have complied with the order of this Court, though not to the satisfaction of the petitioner, this Court is of the view that since an order has been passed, it is open for the petitioner to assail the said order, if he is aggrieved by the same.

¶28

6. For the aforesaid reason, there is no necessity to proceed with the contempt petition and no further adjudication is necessary and therefore, the Contempt Petition is closed.

¶29

12.09.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No msv To 1.Thiru.V.Rajaraman, I.A.S., Secretary to Government, Information and Public Relation Department, State of Tamil Nadu,Fort St.George,Chennai 600 009.

¶30

2.Dr.R.Vaidyanathan, I.A.S., Director, Information and Public Relation Department, Government of Tamil Nadu Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.

¶31

_________ Page 3 of 4

¶32

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

¶33

Cont.P.No.2500 of 2025

¶34

T.VINOD KUMAR,J.

¶35

msv

¶36

Cont.P.No.2500 of 2025

¶37

12.09.2025

¶38

_________ Page 4 of 4

¶39

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

V.Dayalan v. Thiru. v.Rajaraman, Ias., and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Dayalan v. Thiru. v.Rajaraman, Ias., and another

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

Shri Rajvinder Singh Vs Director (I and Q C)

Tamil Nadu Village Administrative Officers Association, Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

A.S.Sathya Lakshmi Vs The Managing Director

V.Ravichandran Vs Selvam

G.anandraj Ex constable Vs The Union of India

S.Vijaya Prapakaran, Vs Mr. M.Sudarsan B.E., (Honor)