IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. DHANDAPANI, J.
K. Karpagam & Another – Appellants
Versus
Balamurugan, Secretary, Muthukaruppan Memorial Higher Secondary School, Thoothukudi – Respondent
Cont. Ptn. (MD) NOS. 822 & 823 Of 2022 IN W.P. (MD) NOS. 14823 & 14825 Of 2020
Decided On : 01-03-2023
Contempt of Court - Disobedience of Court Order - Contempt of Court Act, 1971, Section 11
Fact of the Case:
Allegations of willful disobedience of court order by the respondent, leading to filing of contempt petitions. Dispute between petitioners and respondent, who are closely related, regarding management of a school. Court had previously quashed disciplinary proceedings against petitioners and issued directions for reinstatement and enquiry. Allegations of non-compliance with reinstatement order and subsequent suspension of petitioners.
Finding of the Court:
The respondent's actions were found to be in contempt of court and detrimental to the functioning of the school. The court acknowledged the long-standing reputation of the school and the impact of the dispute on the students' education. The court also invoked Section 18-A of the Tamil Nadu Recognized Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973, to appoint a Special Officer and ensure direct payment of grants-in-aid for better school administration.
Issues: Disobedience of court order, suspension and reinstatement of petitioners, impact on school functioning, invocation of Section 18-A of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found the respondent's actions to be in contempt and detrimental to the school's functioning, leading to the invocation of Section 18-A of the Act to appoint a Special Officer and ensure direct payment of grants-in-aid.
Final Decision: The court directed the transfer of petitioners to nearby schools, appointment of a suitable person as Headmaster, appointment of a retired official to run the school temporarily, and completion of the enquiry. The contempt petitions were closed.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Contempt Petition (MD) No.822/2022 filed Under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, to punish the contemnor for the deliberate and wilful disobedience of the order dated 27.04.2022 passed by this Court in W.P. (MD).No.14823 of 2020. Contempt Petition (MD) No.823/2022 filed Under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, to punish the contemnor for the deliberate and wilful disobedience of the order dated 27.04.2022 passed by this Court in W.P. (MD).No.14825 of 2020.)
Common Order:
1. Alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 27.04.2022, passed in W.P. (MD).Nos.14823 and 14825 of 2020, dated 27.04.2022, the present contempt petitions have been filed
2. The petitioners are mother and son who were working as Headmistress and Office Assistant in Muthukaruppan Memorial Higher Secondary School, Subbammalpuram, Sillakulam Post, Ottapidaram (Taluk), Thoothukudi District. The petitioners and the contemnor’s are related to each other. In that, the contemnor and the petitioner in W.P. No.14823/2020 are brother and sister, whose forefathers had started the school in the year 1930. The respondent is the Secretary of Muthukaruppan Memorial Higher Secondary School. The school is under the management of respondent. Due to inter se dispute between the petitioners and the respondent, departmental action was initiated against the petitioners resulting in the filing of the writ petition, in which this Court quashed the proceedings and issued a series of directions, including a direction to appoint an enquiry officer to enquire into the dispute and to submit a report.
3. The main allegation raised by the petitioners against the respondent is that the respondent, who is the Secretary of the School, is intent on appointing his son as the Headmaster of the school in the place of the petitioner in W.P. No. 14823/2020. Contrarily, the respondent claims that the petitioners are trying to usurp the property by the petitioner in W.P. (MD) No.14823/20 appointing her own son as the Office Assistant in the school.
4. The off-shoot of the dispute is the initiation of disciplinary proceedings as against the petitioners by issuance of order of suspension, which resulted in the filing of the writ petitions, in which this Court had passed the following order:-
“7. When the parties have arrived at a consensus for a consent order and made submissions accordingly, this Court thought fit to give quietus to the issues as the facts are complex in nature and further the Management people and the petitioners are close relatives. In view of the consent expressed by the respective parties to the writ petitions through the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents, this Court is inclined to pass the following orders:
(i) The impugned orders of suspension, dated 07.10.2020, passed by the respondents 4 and 6 are quashed. The petitioners are directed to be reinstated into service forthwith.
(ii) The District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Thoothukudi District, is directed to appoint an Enquiry Officer not below the rank of a retired District Educational Officer for the purpose of conducting domestic enquiry, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(iii) The District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Thoothukudi District, shall fix remuneration to be paid to the Enquiry Officer by the Management of the respondent School.
(iv) The Enquiry Officer, as appointed by the District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, shall commence the enquiry proceedings immediately by issuing notice to all the parties to the writ petitions by fixing a date and time and proceed with the enquiry by following the procedures as contemplated.
(v) Opportunity of hearing must be provided to all the parties and the enquiry report is directed to be submitted within a period of three months from the date of commence
Contempt Petition - Merely because an order or decree is executable, that would not take away Court’s jurisdiction to deal with a matter under Act of 1971 on satisfaction that there has been violatio....
Willful disobedience of a court order amounts to contempt of court and is punishable under the provisions of the Contempt Court Act, 1971.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.