Contempt proceedings cannot be treated as execution proceedings, and the fact of wilful disobedience must be considered in a contempt proceeding.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Contempt Petition filed Under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondent for having willfully disobeyed the order dated 11.01.2022 passed in W.P.No.9397 of 2015.)

1. The contempt petition has been filed to punish the respondent for having willfully disobeyed the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.9397 of 2015. This Court passed the following orders:

“7. Thus, the claim made by the petitioner seeking for regularization of his non-employment period between 05.12.1993 and 17.10.2004 seems justifiable. Insofar as the monetary claim for the said period is concerned, the respondents shall consider the same, in the light of G.O.Ms.No.1664, dated 04.09.1978, if the same is applicable to him, and pass appropriate orders.

8. In the light of the above observations, the petitioner is granted liberty to make a fresh representation, by enclosing a copy of this order along with any other Government Orders he may rely upon, to the second respondent herein, as expeditiously as possible and on receipt of the same, the second respondent shall take into consideration all the observations made in this order and accordingly pass an appropriate order, regularizing the petitioner's services for the non-employment period and further consider his claim for the salaries during his period of non-employment. Such an order shall be passed by the second respondent, atleast within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of the petitioner's representation.

9. The Writ Petition stands disposed of, accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.”

2. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent furnished the copy of the proceedings dated 28.06.2022 issued by the Director of Elementary Education, Chennai and the proceedings dated 11.07.2022 issued by the Block Educational Officer, Kammapuram and made a submission that the orders passed by this Court has been complied with. The case of the writ petitioner was considered in the light of the observations made by this Court in a writ proceedings and based on the relevant materials available on records, the authorities have passed an order.

3. The learned counsel for the contempt petitioner made a submission that the order has not been passed in accordance with the directions issued by this Court. This Court passed an order, directing the authorities to regularize the services and the said portion of the direction issued by this Court has not been considered by the competent authorities. However, they have passed an order in respect of the monetary benefits to be granted. Therefore, the contempt exists.

4. This Court is of the considered opinion that the contempt proceedings cannot be proceeded as an execution proceedings. Whether the respondent has wilfully disobeyed the order of this Court or not is the fact to be considered in a contempt proceedings.

5. This Court passed an order, granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation along with the documents and this Court further directed the authorities to look into the observations and take a decision and pass appropriate orders. In the first paragraph of the order dated 28.06.2022 itself, the respondent has stated that he has considered the relief along with the directions issued by this Court. They have rejected the claim of the writ petitioner for monetary benefits, which includes the benefit of regularization, which was sought for by the writ petitioner.

6. If at all any further clarification or relief is required, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order passed by the Director of Elementary Education in proceedings dated 28.06.2022. Contrarily, this Court cannot punish the respondent in a contempt proceedings as there is no wilful disobedience or otherwise.

7. Thus, the contempt petition stands closed. No costs.