Disposed¶38

S.Kumaraguru v. R.Ponmudi

Madras HC9 Apr 2025CONT P(MD)/2539/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cont.P.(MD) No.2539 of 2024 in W.P.(MD) No.13077 of 2024; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; Battu Devanand J; decided 09.04.2025. Contempt of Courts Act Section 11; willful disobedience of writ order dated 20.06.2024; delay of around 5 months in implementation; Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd.; Managing Director R.Ponmudi; General Manager S.Raja; terminal benefits of retired employees; State Government fund release piecemeal; entire amount paid with interest; unconditional apology accepted as bonafide; no willful default; contempt petition closed without punishment.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Petition closed without imposing any punishment; the 1st respondent's unconditional apology was accepted as bonafide, and the respondents had already paid the entire amount to the petitioner with interest. ¶38

S.Kumaraguru Vs R.Ponmudi — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶38

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents willfully and deliberately disobeyed the order dated 20.06.2024 in W.P.(MD) No.13077 of 2024, warranting punishment under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act.

¶14

Court's answer

There was no willful default on the part of the 1st respondent in the delay that occurred in implementing the order of this Court.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

The delay is attributable to the State Government, which is not releasing funds regularly and periodically to the State Transport Corporations.

¶32

Key takeaways

The unconditional apology rendered by the 1st respondent for the delay was accepted by the Court as bonafide.ratio¶37
Observation: if the State Government releases funds periodically to the Transport Corporations, their officers would not face the embarrassment of appearing personally before the Court in several contempt cases.obiter¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt petition under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act by S.Kumaraguru against R.Ponmudi, Managing Director, and S.Raja, General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd., complaining of willful disobedience of the order dated 20.06.2024 in W.P.(MD) No.13077 of 2024, implementation of which was delayed by around five months. The respondents paid the entire amount to the petitioner with interest, which the petitioner's counsel accepted. The 1st respondent attributed the delay to the State Government not releasing funds properly and on a piecemeal manner, causing financial crisis to the Corporation, and rendered an unconditional apology. Holding that there was no willful default on the 1st respondent's part and that the delay was attributable to the State Government's irregular fund release to the State Transport Corporations, the Court accepted the apology as bonafide and closed the contempt petition, observing that periodic release of funds would spare Corporation officers the embarrassment of personal appearance in contempt cases. (Battu Devanand, J.; decided 09.04.2025)

¶1

Cont.P.(MD) No.2539 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 09.04.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶6

Cont.P.(MD) No.2539 of 2024 in W.P.(MD) No.13077 of 2024

S.Kumaraguru

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1.R.Ponmudi

Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd., No.27, New Railway Station Road, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur Distrit-612 001.

¶12

2.S.Raja

¶13

General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd., No.140, Public Office Road, Velipalayam, Nagapattinam-611 001, Nagapattinam Regional Office. .. Respondents

¶14

Prayer : Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondents for having willfully and deliberately disobeyed the orders of this Court passed in W.P.(MD)No.13077 of 2024, dated 20.06.2024 and for having committed contempt of Court.

¶15

_________Page 1 of 6

¶16

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

¶17

Cont.P.(MD) No.2539 of 2024

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Manoharan For Respondents : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This contempt case has been filed complaining willful

¶21

disobedience of the respondents in implementing the order, dated 20.06.2024 in W.P.(MD)No.13077 of 2024.

¶22

After hearing the respondent in person and their counsels, this

¶23

Court prima facie came to an opinion that the respondents failed to implement the order of the Court in true letter and spirit as there is a

¶24

delay of around 5 months in implementing the order of the Court.

¶25

Mr.R.Ponmudi, the 1^st respondent herein who appeared in person

¶26

before this Court submits that the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited is suffering with financial crisis due

¶27

to the reason that the State Government is not releasing the funds properly and due to that reason, the Corporation could not settle the terminal benefits and other benefits for the retired employees and they

¶28

_________Page 2 of 6

¶29

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

¶30

Cont.P.(MD) No.2539 of 2024

¶31

are also facing very serious difficulties due to the reason that the State Government releasing funds on piecemeal manner. In the present case, due to that reason only, delay has occurred in implementing the order of this Court and however, they paid the entire amount to the petitioner with interest. The learned counsel for the petitioner also accepted the same.

¶32

Considering the reason stated by the 1^st respondent, it appears that there is no any willful default on his part in the delay occurred in implementing the order of this Court. The delay has to be attributable to the State Government, who is not releasing the funds regularly and periodically to the State Transport Corporations. Due to that reason only, in number of cases, the Managing Directors and General Managers of Transport Corporation are forced to appear before this Court in the contempt cases. If State Government release funds periodically to the Transport Corporations, the officers of the Transport Corporations in the State would not face such embarrassment to appear personally before the Court in several contempt cases.

¶33

_________Page 3 of 6

¶34

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

¶35

Cont.P.(MD) No.2539 of 2024

¶36

The respondent present before this Court rendered his

¶37

unconditional apology for the delay caused in implementation of the order of this Court. Considering the reasons for delay submitted by him and considering his unconditional apology, this Court is accepting it as bonafide.

¶38

Accordingly, this Contempt Petition is closed.

¶39

09.04.2025

¶40

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes

¶41

gbg

¶42

¶43

1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd., No.27, New Railway Station Road, Kumbakonam,

¶44

Thanjavur Distrit-612 001.

¶45

_________Page 4 of 6

¶46

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

¶47

Cont.P.(MD) No.2539 of 2024

¶48

2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd., No.140, Public Office Road, Velipalayam, Nagapattinam-611 001, Nagapattinam Regional Office.

¶49

Page 5 of 6

¶50

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

¶51

Cont.P.(MD) No.2539 of 2024

¶52

BATTU DEVANAND, J.

¶53

gbg

¶54

Cont.P.(MD) No.2539 of 2024