SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3066

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. SOUNTHAR, J.
Durgadevi Venkatesan Panchayat President Palayanur Village Panchayat Palayanur Village and Post Tiruvannamalai - Petitioner 
Versus
Thiru Baskara Pandian, I.A.S., District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District – Respondent
Contempt Petition No.856 of 2024
Decided On : 12-03-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mrs. AL. Gandhimathi, Senior Advocate M/s. L. Palanimuthu
For the Respondent:Mr. J. Ravindran, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr. K. Tippu Sulthan, Government Advocate.

Failure to comply with a court order, even pending appeal without stay, constitutes contempt of court.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 - Section 205 - Contempt of Court - Failure to implement court order - The respondent, as District Collector, disobeyed the court's order to restore the petitioner's cheque signing power, leading to a contempt petition. The court found wilful disobedience as the respondent did not comply with the order from 21.09.2023 until the petitioner's removal on 15.07.2024. (Paras 2, 7, 19, 20)

(B) Unconditional Apology - The respondent tendered an apology and paid Rs.25,000/- as reparation for non-compliance. The court accepted the apology but warned against future violations. (Paras 21, 22)

(C) Duty of Officials - The court emphasized the need for officials to comply with court orders and to challenge them through proper legal channels if dissatisfied. (Paras 23, 24)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged the withdrawal of her cheque signing power, which was quashed by the court. The respondent's failure to restore this power led to the contempt petition.

Findings of Court:
The respondent's actions constituted wilful disobedience of the court's order.

Issues: Whether the respondent's failure to comply amounted to wilful disobedience and the maintainability of the contempt petition in absence of a stay.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that non-compliance with a court order, even during the pendency of an appeal without a stay, is contemptuous.

Result: Contempt petition closed upon acceptance of the respondent's unconditional apology.

ORDER :

(S. SOUNTHAR, J.)

This Contempt Petition has been filed to punish the respondent for his alleged wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court dated 21.09.2023 in W.P.No.24920 of 2023.

2. The petitioner herein filed the above writ petition challenging the order passed by the respondent dated 24.07.2023 withdrawing the cheque signing power available to her in her capacity as President of the Panchayat and transferring the said power in favour of concerned Block Development Officer, who was arrayed as 4th respondent in the writ petition. The above said writ petition was allowed by this Court on 21.09.2023 and order impugned therein was quashed. However, the respondent, who functioned as District Collector/Inspector of Panchayat of Thiruvannamalai District at that point of time, failed to implement the order passed by this Court by restoring the cheque signing power to the petitioner.

3. It is stated by the petitioner that pursuant to the allowing of the writ petition, she made a representation to the respondent on 09.12.2023 requesting him to restore her powers to sign the cheques and other incidental financial powers in her capacity as President of the Panchayat. Though the said representation was received by the respondent as seen from the postal acknowledgment card dated 11.12.2023, the order passed by this Court has not been implemented and consequently, the cheque signing power has not been restored. Therefore, the petitioner issued a contempt notice on 20.01.2024 through her counsel requesting the respondent to restore the cheque signing power by implementing the order passed by this Court. The contempt notice issued by the petitioner’s counsel was received by the respondent on 27.01.2024 as seen from the postal acknowledgment card. Even then, the order passed by this Court has not been implemented by restoring status quo ante (i.e., restoration of cheque signing power). Therefore, the petitioner was constrained to file the present contempt petition with the above said prayer.

4. It is seen from the papers that the contempt petition was presented before this Court on 19.02.2024. After numbering, the contempt petition came up for first hearing on 26.03.2024. On that day, Mr.N.Naveenkumar, learned Government Advocate had taken notice for the respondent and sought time to get instructions. At his request, the matter was adjourned to 26.04.2024. On 26.04.2024, at the request of learned counsel for the respondent, the matter was adjourned to 14.06.2024. On that day, again, at request of the learned counsel for the respondent, the matter was adjourned to 21.06.2024. On 21.06.2024 for the first time it was represented by the respondent’s counsel that writ appeal had been preferred challenging the order passed in the writ petition and the same was yet to be numbered. Recording the same, the matter was adjourned to 12.07.2024. On 12.07.2024, it was represented on behalf of the respondent that the writ appeal was listed on 15.07.2024 for hearing. Therefore, the matter was again adjourned to 16.08.2024. On 16.08.2024, the matter was not listed and the matter was only listed on 19.08.2024. On that day, the matter was adjourned to 23.08.2024. On 23.08.2024 at request of learned counsel for the respondent, the matter was adjourned to 06.09.2024. On 06.09.2024 again at request of the learned counsel for the respondent, the matter was adjourned to 13.09.2024. On 13.09.2024, at request of learned counsel for the respondent, the matter was adjourned to 30.09.2024. On 30.09.2024, it was informed by the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent that the writ appeal filed against the order passed in main writ petition was numbered as W.A.No.2846 of 2024 and notice had been ordered to the respondent therein. Recording the same, the matter was adjourned to 19.10.2024. On 19.10.2024, this Court passed the following order:-

“It is seen from the records the contempt petition has been pending from 26.03.2024 and insp

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top