M.Prabhu v. Durairaj and 3 others

Madras HC18 Nov 2025CONT P/2959/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court contempt closure order, 18-11-2025, CONT P No. 2959 of 2025, M.Prabhu v. Durairaj (Tahsildar), Poonkodi (BDO), Kathiravan (VAO) and John Peter; compliance recorded with interim order dated 22.05.2024 of Justice G.R.Swaminathan in W.M.P.No.14160 of 2024 in W.P.No.13007 of 2024 (burial prohibition); body buried 29.03.2025 removed and reinterred in notified area; direction against further burials maintained; petition closed, no punishment.

What did the court decide?

No punishment imposed; contempt petition closed after recording compliance with the interim order dated 22.05.2024, with a continuing direction to the respondents to ensure no further burial in the area. ¶¶35

M.Prabhu Vs Durairaj and 3 others — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CONT P No. 2959 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 18-11-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

CONT P No. 2959 of 2025

¶7

1. M.Prabhu

¶8

S/o.Muthaiah, M.G.R.Colony, Prammadhesam Village and Post, Veppanthattai Taluk, Perambalur District.

Petitioner(s)

1. Durairaj

The Tahsildar, Veppanthattai Taluk office, Perambalur district.

¶13

2.Poonkodi,

¶14

The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat), Veppanthattai Block Development Office, Veppanthattai, Perambalur District.

¶15

3.Kathiravan,

¶16

The Village Administrative Officer, Prammadhesam Village, Veppanthattai Taluk, Perambalur district.

¶17

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

¶18

CONT P No. 2959 of 2025

¶19

4.John Peter, S/o.Sebasitian, M.G.R.Colony, Prammadhesam Village and Post, Veppanthattai Taluk, Perambalur District.

¶20

Contemnor(s)

¶21

PRAYER

¶22

To punish the Respondents for their willful disobedience to the order of this Hon'ble Court dated 22.05.2024 passed in W.M.P.No.14160 of 2024 in W.P.No.13007 of 2024.

¶23

For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Vijaya Ragavan For Contemnor(s): Mr.J.Ravindran Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.J.Mohamed Sathik Government Advocate

¶24

ORDER

¶25

I heard Mr.M.Vijaya Ragavan for the petitioner and Mr.J.Ravindran,

¶26

Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.J.Mohamed Sathik, Government Advocate for the respondents.

¶27

2.Both the counsels agree that the body which was buried on 29.03.2025

¶28

has been removed and has been reintered in a notified area. This process has

¶29

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