Disposed¶26

R.Durairaj and Another v. Sibi Adhitya Senthil Kumar IAS

Madras HC6 Feb 2026CONT P/194/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: contempt petition; Section 11 & 12, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971; wilful disobedience of judgment dated 28.03.2025 in W.P.No.9202 of 2025; District Collector Cuddalore acting as Arbitrator; award/proceeding dated 11.09.2025; Apex Court judgment not referred to; legality of District Collector's order not examinable in contempt proceedings; remedy in the manner known to law; petition closed. Relevant to litigants considering contempt as a route to enforce compliance with a writ order where the implementing authority's subsequent award is disputed - this Court confined itself to closing the petition and directed the petitioners to other legal remedies.

What did the court decide?

The legality of the order passed by the District Collector cannot be gone into in this Contempt Petition. ¶25

R.Durairaj and Another Vs Sibi Adhitya Senthil Kumar IAS — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CONT P No. 194 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 06-02-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

CONT P No. 194 of 2026

¶7

R.Durairaj

¶8

R.Krishnamurthy

¶9

..Petitioner(s)

¶10

¶11

Sibi Adhitya Senthil Kumar, IAS The Arbitrator cum District Collector, District Collectorate, Cuddalore.

¶12

..Contemnor(s)

¶13

Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 & 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, seeking to grant an order of initiate Contempt proceeding against the alleged respondent for wilfully and deliberately disobeying the judgement dated on 28.03.2025 in W.P.No.9202 of 2025.

¶14

For Petitioner(s): Mr.Neethidurai V.

¶15

For Contemnor(s): Mr.P.Sathish

¶16

Additional Government Pleader

¶17

Page1 of 4

¶18

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

¶19

CONT P No. 194 of 2026

¶20

ORDER

¶21

When the matter was taken up for hearing today, proceeding of the District Collector, Cuddalore dated 11.09.2025 was placed before this Court.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that while the award

¶23

was passed by the District Collector, the judgment of the Apex Court was not even referred to and therefore, the award passed by the District Collector is not strictly in compliance with the order passed by this Court.

¶24

In the considered view of this Court, the legality of the order passed by

¶25

the District Collector cannot be gone into in this Contempt Petition. Therefore, if the petitioners have any grievance, it is open to the petitioners to workout the remedy in the manner known to law.

¶26