J.Johnson Devakumar Jacob, Vs C.Jeyachandran — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2025)

J.Johnson Devakumar Jacob, Vs C.Jeyachandran — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt petition closed after compliance was reported; cheque for Rs.5,99,391/- towards subsistence allowance handed over to the petitioner in court; liberty left to the petitioner to work out his remedy against the proceedings dated 06.11.2025 denying DCRG; earlier order dated 31.10.2025 recalled.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent should be punished under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for willful disobedience of the order dated 23.09.2024 passed in W.P.No.27494 of 2024, and whether compliance has since been effected.

Court's answer

The petitioner has already been paid encashment of Earned Leave for 240 days and encashment of UnEarned Leave on Private Affairs for 90 days, totaling Rs.9,68,218/-.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner has already been paid the GPF in the year 2016.

Key takeaways

Only the payment of DCRG remains; the petitioner has been informed through the impugned proceedings dated 06.11.2025 that he will not be entitled to receipt of DCRG.ratio¶20
A sum of Rs.5,99,391/- is payable to the petitioner towards subsistence allowance, and the cheque for the said amount was handed over to the petitioner, who was present in person.ratio¶21
If the petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings dated 06.11.2025 denying DCRG, it is left open to him to work out his remedy in the manner known to law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Petition (S.11, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971) for alleged willful disobedience of the order dated 23.09.2024 in W.P.No.27494 of 2024 — listed 'for reporting compliance'. Status report with proceedings dated 06.11.2025 showed petitioner already paid leave encashment (240 days Earned Leave + 90 days UnEarned Leave on Private Affairs) totaling Rs.9,68,218/- and GPF paid in 2016; cheque for Rs.5,99,391/- towards subsistence allowance handed over to petitioner in court. Only DCRG remained, and by the impugned proceedings dated 06.11.2025 petitioner was informed he is not entitled to DCRG. Held: petitioner at liberty to work out his remedy against those proceedings; earlier order dated 31.10.2025 recalled; contempt petition closed.

Contempt Petition No.3281 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 07.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

Contempt Petition No.3281 of 2025

J.Johnson Devakumar Jacob .. Petitioner

Vs.

Mr.C.Jayachandran The Superintending Engineer CEDC/North/TANGEDCO No.144, Anna Salai Chennai 600 002 .. Respondent

Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondent for the willful disobedience in not complying with the order dated 23.09.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.27494 of 2024.

For Petitioner : Mr.Aravind Subramaniam Senior Counsel for Mr.V.Shenz

For Respondent : Mr.M.Suresh Kumar Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.David Sunder Sing Standing Counsel

O R D E R

Pursuant to the earlier order passed by this Court, the matter was listed

for hearing today “for reporting compliance”.

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

Contempt Petition No.3281 of 2025

Status report along with the proceedings dated 06.11.2025, was placed

before this Court. On going through the same, it is seen that the petitioner has already been paid the encashment of Earned Leave for 240 days and encashment of UnEarned Leave on Private Affairs for 90 days, totaling a sum of Rs.9,68,218/-. Apart from that, the petitioner has already been paid the GPF in the year 2016.

What remains is, only the payment of DCRG. Insofar as the DCRG is concerned, the petitioner has been informed through the impugned proceedings dated 06.11.2025, that he will not be entitled to for the receipt of DCRG.

The learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that a sum of Rs.5,99,391/- is payable to the petitioner towards subsistence allowance. The cheque for the said amount is handed over to the petitioner, who is present in person.

In the light of the above development, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings dated 06.11.2025, it is left open to him to workout his remedy in the manner known to law.

The earlier order passed by this Court on 31.10.2025 is recalled and

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

Contempt Petition No.3281 of 2025

this Contempt Petition stands closed.

07.11.2025

Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No gya

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

Contempt Petition No.3281 of 2025

N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.

gya

Cont. Petn. No.3281 of 2025

07.11.2025

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