A retired watchman filed a contempt petition alleging disobedience of a writ order after the Division Bench modified it on appeal. The Single Judge held that since his order was interfered with to some extent, contempt does not lie before him and closed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CONT P(MD) No. 2655 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 29-06-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
CONT P(MD) No. 2655 of 2023
V.Thiraviam Pilai S/o. Late.K.Venkatachalam pillai, Retired daily wage Watchman, 8, Vellalar Melatheru, Vadasery, Nagercoil-629003.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
..Respondent(s)
Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the Contemnors/Respondents herein for their deliberate and willful disobedience of the order of this Honourable Court dated 27.06.2023 passed in W.P.(MD). NO. 8107 of 2023 which is amounting to Contempt of Court and pass such further or other order as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
Page1 of 4
CONT P(MD) No. 2655 of 2023
For Petitioner(s): Mr.R. Murugan Mr.S. Vashik Ali For Respondent(s): Mr.P.V.Balasubramaniam, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.M.Kannan, Government Advocate
ORDER
The petitioner filed WP(MD)No.8107 of 2023 and it was allowed by me
vide order dated 27.06.2023. Aggrieved by the same, the Government filed WA(MD)No.1105 of 2024. The Hon’ble Division Bench vide order dated 20.01.2026 disposed of the matter in the following manner :
“17.Though there is nothing to interfere in the order of the learned Single Judge in the writ petition, we make it clear that the service of Thiraviyam Pillai to be regularised from 01.01.2006 as Watchman taking into consideration the subsequent restrictions imposed in G.O.Ms.No.74, dated 27.06.2023 and he has to be paid all his retirement and pensionary benefits taking into consideration 50% of the past services from 1982 to 2006 and full service from 2006 to 2012.
18.Accordingly, the appellants are directed to pay the benefits as indicated above to the respondent forthwith. Arrears of pension with 6% interest shall be paid within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. We make it clear that the petitioner will not be entitled for any backwages.
19.With this observations, this Writ Appeal stands disposed of.”
Page2 of 4
CONT P(MD) No. 2655 of 2023
2.As rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate General, the
order passed by me has been interfered with to some extent. Only if the order passed by me has been confirmed in toto, contempt would lie before me. The petitioner will have to move the Hon’ble Division Bench. This contempt petition is not maintainable. It stands closed.
29-06-2026
Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SKM
To
__________ Page3 of 4
CONT P(MD) No. 2655 of 2023
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
SKM
CONT P(MD) No. 2655 of 2023
29-06-2026
__________ Page4 of 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether contempt lies before the Single Judge whose order was partly modified by the Division Bench in the writ appeal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
V.Thiraviam Pilai
A.Apoorva
The Director of Agriculture
G.R.Swaminathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
