BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Shamim Ahmed, J.
Muthuramalingam - Petitioner
Versus
Supriya Sahu - Respondents
CONT.P(MD) No.2134 of 2023 in W.P.(MD) No.16530 of 2014
Decided On : 02-07-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. contempt petition for non-compliance. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. direction issued for absorption and benefits. (Para 3) |
| 3. arguments on compliance and ongoing appeal. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. court's assessment of partial compliance. (Para 6 , 10) |
| 5. discussion on entitlements and compliance status. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 6. conclusion and disposal of contempt petition. (Para 11) |
ORDER :
Shamim Ahmed, J.
This Contempt Petition has been filed with the prayer that the respondents/contemnors have not complied with the judgment and order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.16530 of 2014, dated 12.08.2022.
2.Heard Mr.G.Chandrasekar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Sadiq Raja, learned Additional Government Pleader, for the Respondents.
3.The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(MD) No.16530 of 2014, vide order dated 12.08.2022, had passed the following order:-
“13.In the result
"This Writ Petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to absorb the petitioner in the post of regular Forest Watcher from the date of his immediate juniors, who were absorbed in the post of Forest Watcher and pay all consequential benefits to the petitioner from the date of absorption. The respondents are granted twelve weeks time to pass orders as indicated above."
4.The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that despite the judgment and order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.16530 of 2014, dated 12.08.2022, the respondents have not complied with the directions of this Court and have wilfully and deliberately flouted the order passed by this Court, dated 12.08.2022 and are in contempt of the judgment and order of this Court. Thus, they should be summoned and punished by exercising the powers under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 .
5.Today, when the matter is taken up, Mr.D.Sadiq Raja, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents, submits that challenging the judgment and order, dated 12.08.2022, the respondents have preferred an appeal in W.A.(MD) No.113 of 2024, which is pending before this Court. He further submits that the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, vide order dated 07.02.2024, has granted an order of interim stay in C.M.P.(MD) No.976 of 2024 as follows:-
“There shall be an order of interim stay only in respect of payment of arrears of Bank wages. It is made clear that there is no interim order in respect of regularization of the services of the respondent/writ petitioner and the same will be subject to the outcome of this writ appeal.”
6.However, in compliance of the order passed by the Writ Court, dated 12.08.2022 in W.P.(MD) No.16530 of 2014, the respondents have filed a counter affidavit, dated 18.04.2024, annexing a copy of the Government Order made in G.O.(2D) No.16, Environment, Climate Change and Forest (FR.2.(ii)) Department, dated 24.01.2024, in which it has been stated that the judgment and order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.16530 of 2014, dated 12.08.2022 has been complied with. The counter affidavit filed by the respondents is taken on record and a copy of the same has also been given to the learned counsel for the petitioner.
7.The learned Additional Government Pleader further submits that the respondents have regularized the services of the petitioner as Forest Watcher notionally by relaxing Rule 2, 4 and 5 of Tamil Nadu Forest Subordinate Service in respect of method of appointment, age and other qualifications and the petitioner is not entitled to any monetary benefits, but he is entitled for counting of the service for the purpose of pension and other retirement benefits as per the provisions enshrined in Rule 27(17) of the Fundamental Rules of Tamil Nadu Government, however, subject to the outcome of W.A. (MD) No.113 of 2024. Thus, he submits that the respondents may be discharged from the present contempt proceedings, as the judgment and order of this Court dated 12.08.2022 has been fully complied with.
8.Mr.G.Chandrasekar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
The court found partial compliance with the previous judgment regarding job regularization, concluding that contempt proceedings were unnecessary due to the ongoing appeal affecting benefits.
Non-compliance with court orders leads to contempt, but full compliance results in dismissal of such proceedings.
Non-compliance with court orders constitutes contempt, but fulfillment of directives leads to discharge from contempt proceedings.
The court confirmed that compliance with judicial orders is essential, and upon finding adequate compliance, discharge from contempt proceedings is warranted.
Court reaffirmed the necessity of compliance with judicial orders, emphasizing that non-compliance can lead to contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act.
The specific direction of the court in implementing its orders is crucial in determining contempt of court.
Compliance with a court order results in disposal of a contempt petition.
Court dismissal of contempt based on compliance with previous orders and procedural rights for further challenges establishes adherence to judicial processes.
Compliance with court orders is mandatory, and failure to adhere can lead to contempt proceedings as ruled in the present case.
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.