Disposed¶27

Mr. Om Prakash v. Mr. M.Prathap

Madras HC10 Apr 2026CONT P/4394/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition, Section 11 Contempt of Courts Act, Madras High Court, compliance with order dated 09.09.2025 in W.P.No. 33399 of 2025, representation dated 12.04.2024, disposal order dated 09.03.2026, rejection citing pending review, consideration subject to outcome of review, District Collector Tiruvallur, petition closed, no punishment.

What did the court decide?

No punishment ordered; the Contempt Petition was closed as the order dated 09.09.2025 was found to have been complied with, with the observation that the respondent will consider the petitioner's request once the pending review is disposed of. ¶27

Mr. Om Prakash Vs Mr. M.Prathap — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CONT P No. 4394 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 10-04-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

CONT P No. 4394 of 2025

Mr. Om Prakash

..Petitioner(s)

Vs.

Mr.M.Prathap, The District Collector, Tiruvallur Collectrate, Tiruvallur.

¶11

..Contemnor(s)

¶12

Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, seeking to punish the Respondent for willfully disobeying the order dated 09.09.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No. 33399 of 2025.

¶13

For Petitioner(s): Mr.N.Nagu Sah For Contemnor(s): Mrs.S.Indhu Bala Additional Government Pleader

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would submit that as directed by this Court vide order dated 09.09.2025, the petitioner’s representation dated 12.04.2024 was disposed of by the respondent

¶16

by order dated 09.03.2026. Therefore, no further is required to be passed. The

¶17

copy of the order dated 09.03.2026 is also produced before this Court.

¶18

Page1 of 4

¶19

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

¶20

CONT P No. 4394 of 2025

¶21

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the

¶22

said order has been passed rejecting the petitioner’s request stating that there is a review pending.

¶23

The learned Additional Government Pleader would further submit that

¶24

that in the order itself it is stated that subject to out come of the review, the petitioner’s request would be considered.

¶25

In such being the case, since the order itself the respondents stated that

¶26

they would consider the petitioner’s request subject to outcome of the review, certainly, the respondent will consider the petitioner’s request once the review is disposed of.

¶27

For the present, the order dated 09.09.2025 is complied with as the respondents considered the petitioner’s representation and passed the order dated 09.03.2026. Hence, this Contempt Petition is closed.

¶28

10-04-2026

¶29

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶30

KKN

¶31

__________ Page2 of 4

¶32

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

¶33

CONT P No. 4394 of 2025