A.Jayapandian Vs Shanthi — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2026)

A.Jayapandian Vs Shanthi — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2026)

Cont.P.No.709 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

Cont.P.No.709 of 2026

A.Jayapandian, B.T. Assistant (History) Annai Velankanni Matha Hr.Sec.School No.77, Peravur, Kanchival Post Kuttalam Taluk Nagapattinam District 612 203. (Now Mayiladuthurai District)

...Petitioner

Vs.

Shanthi, The District Educational Officer Mayiladuthurai Nagapattinam District. (Now Mayiladuthurai District)

...Respondents

Prayer: This Contempt Petition is filed Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondent for wilfully disobeying the orders passed in W.P.No.1598 of 2018 dated 19.03.2024.

1/5

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

Cont.P.No.709 of 2026 For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Neduchezhiyan

For Respondent(s): Ms.Y.Kavitha Government Advocate

ORDER

This Contempt Petition is filed alleging non-compliance and

Wilfull disobedience of the order dated 19.03.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.1598 of 2018.

2. This Court while disposing of the aforesaid Writ Petition setting aside the order impugned therein dated 10.10.2017, directed the respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as B.T. Assistant (History) in the fourth respondent school therein, from the initial date of appointment i.e., 02.01.2012 with all consequential and monetary benefits within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Thus, the respondent was required to comply with the order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

3. In all normal circumstances, the aforesaid order of this Court

would have been uploaded on the website of this Court immediately.

2/5

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

Cont.P.No.709 of 2026 Thereafter, the order also would have been dispatched to the parties concerned. Thus, the petitioner cannot claim that the order was not provided to him.

4. Taking note of the aforesaid facts, the Court have granted three months time to the respondent to comply with the order, breach, if any, by the respondent would have occurred by the end of June, 2024. Thus, the limitation prescribed under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for filing the present Contempt Petition would start from the said date.

5. Admittedly, present Contempt Petition has not been presented within one year from the said date. On the other hand, it has been presented on 2 nd February, 2026, which is beyond the period of one year prescribed under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

6. In view of the above and taking note of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of S.Tirupathi Rao, V. Lingamaiah, and Ors., reported in 2024 SCC Online 1764 , this Court is of the view that the present Contempt Petition cannot be entertained.

3/5

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

Cont.P.No.709 of 2026

7. Accordingly, the Contempt Petition is closed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to workout is remedy which is open to law, if so advised.

12.06.2026

Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No dna

4/5

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

Cont.P.No.709 of 2026 T.VINOD KUMAR, J.

dna

Cont.P.No.709 of 2026

12.06.2026

5/5

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