Dismissed¶26

Zahirudeen v. Anwar Shameem

Madras HC27 Mar 2026SUB A(MD)/29/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt of Courts Act Section 11; leave to file contempt petition; Advocate Commissioner; re-election; Pallivasal; voters list; dead persons included; erroneous removal; election OP; Wakf Tribunal; civil suit; W.P.(MD)No.22825 of 2025; WA(MD).No.1216/2025 dated 02.06.2025; Cont.P(MD) SR No.3102 of 2026; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; G.R.Swaminathan J.; K.Rajasekar J.; sub application dismissed; contempt petition closed at SR stage; Zahirudeen; Anwar Shameem; Mohammed Imran; A.Saravanan.

What did the court decide?

The liberty granted while disposing of W.P.(MD)No.22825 of 2025 was intended only to enable the petitioner to file a civil suit or an election OP before the appropriate Court or Wakf Tribunal, and did not amount to leave to file a contempt petition against the court-appointed commissioners. ¶23

Zahirudeen Vs Anwar Shameem — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether leave should be granted under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act to the petitioner to file Cont.P(MD) SR No.3102 of 2026 against the contemnor Advocate Commissioners for their willful and deliberate disobedience of the judgment in WA(MD).No.1216/2025 dated 02.06.2025. +1 more

¶15

Court's answer

Leave under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act was not granted; the sub application was dismissed and the contempt petition was closed at the SR stage.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

¶23

Key takeaways

The petitioner's contentions that the voters list was not drawn properly, that dead persons were included, and that the petitioner originally included in the list was later erroneously removed can as well be urged in the election OP.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Sub application SUB A(MD) No.29 of 2026 under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, seeking leave to prosecute Cont.P(MD) SR No.3102 of 2026 against court-appointed Advocate Commissioners (Anwar Shameem and Mohammed Imran) for alleged willful and deliberate disobedience of the judgment in WA(MD).No.1216/2025 dated 02.06.2025 - dismissed. The Court (G.R.Swaminathan J., order authored; K.Rajasekar J. concurring) clarified that the liberty granted in the disposal of W.P.(MD)No.22825 of 2025 on 14.12.2025 was intended only for filing a civil suit or an election OP before the appropriate Court or Wakf Tribunal, not for initiating contempt proceedings against the commissioners; grievances regarding the voters list (improper drawing, inclusion of dead persons, erroneous removal of the petitioner) are to be urged in the election OP. The contempt petition was closed at the SR stage.

¶1

SUB A(MD) NO. 29 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27-03-2026

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶7

SUB A(MD) NO. 29 of 2026 IN

¶8

CONT P(MD) SR NO. 3102 OF 2026

¶9

Zahirudeen S/o. N.M.Pasha 117/43 Town Hall Road Madurai 625 001.

¶10

Appellant(s)

¶11

¶12

Anwar Shameem Advocate Commissioner Chamber No.37 Law Chamber High Court Building Madurai. 2. Mohammed Imran Advocate Commissioner Chamber No.48 Law Chamber High Court Building Madurai.

¶13

Respondent(s)

¶14

For Appellant(s): Mr.A.Saravanan

¶15

Prayer: This petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act to Grant Leave to the petitioner to file the present Cont.P(MD) SR No.3102 of 2026 against the Contemnors for their willful and deliberate disobedience of the judgment passed by this Court made in

¶16

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

¶17

WA(MD). No.1216/2025 dated 02.06.2025 and thus render justice.

¶18

ORDER

¶19

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble G.R.Swaminathan J.)

¶20

The petitioner hearin filed W.P.(MD)No.22825 of 2025 for directing the court appointed commissioners to conduct re-election for the petition mentioned Pallivasal. The writ petition was disposed of by us on 14.12.2025 in the following terms:-

¶21

“4. In this background, the present writ petition has been filed to direct the Court Commissioner to conduct re-election. Re-election can be ordered only if the election

¶22

originally held is nullified. In this writ petition, the election already held has not been impugned at all. Granting liberty to the petitioner to avail such remedy available in law, this writ petition stands disposed of.”

¶23

2.When we granted liberty, we expected the petitioner to file a civil suit or an election OP before the appropriate Court or Wakf Tribunal. We did not intend to grant leave to the petitioner to file a contempt petition against the court appointed commissioners. The

¶24

petitioner would allege that the voters list was not drawn properly and that dead persons were also included and that the petitioner who was included originally in the list was later erroneously removed. These contentions can as well be urged in the election OP.

¶25

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

¶26