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) 4396

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


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.G.Chandrasekar
For the Respondent: Mr.D.Sadiq Raja Additional Government Pleader

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.

Headnote:(A) Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Sections 11 and 12 - Compliance of court orders - The respondents have failed to fully comply with the order to absorb the petitioner as a Forest Watcher, leading to a contempt petition. The court recognizes partial compliance and decides to discharge the respondents from contempt proceedings. (Paras 4, 10)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - The court examined the enforcement of its previous order and noted that the respondents have filed an appeal impacting the finality of the judgment. (Paras 5, 9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought enforcement of a court order for regularization as a Forest Watcher, asserting the respondents' non-compliance with the order made in W.P.(MD) No.16530 of 2014. The respondents submitted a counter asserting partial compliance due to an interim stay related to monetary benefits.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the respondents had partly complied with the earlier judgment regarding the petitioner's regularization and therefore decided to discharge them from contempt proceedings.

Issues: The court addressed whether the order for regularization had been complied with and the implications of an appeal affecting compliance.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that although there was part compliance with its directives, contempt proceedings were unnecessary at this stage due to the ongoing appeal concerning monetary benefits.

Result: Contempt Petition disposed of, and respondents discharged from contempt proceedings.

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

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