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) 4424

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
SHAMIM AHMED, J.
A. Johnson Irudhayaraj - Petitioner 
Versus
K. Amutha - Respondents
Cont. P.(MD) No.1699 of 2019 in W.P.(MD) No.18654 of 2019
Decided On : 08-07-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ms. A. Amala
For the Respondent: Mr. D. Sadiq Raja, Additional Government Pleader.

Non-compliance with court orders constitutes contempt, but fulfillment of directives leads to discharge from contempt proceedings.

Headnote:(A) Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Sections 11 and 12 - Willful disobedience of court order - The respondents issued a cancellation of approval for the petitioner's appointment despite a previous court order mandating its grant; the court quashed the cancellation order and directed compliance - Non-compliance resulted in contempt petition by the petitioner. (Paras 3, 5, 7)

(B) Compliance - After the respondent submitted an affidavit confirming compliance with the court's order, including payment of arrears, the petitioner expressed no objections to discharge from contempt proceedings. (Paras 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
The contempt petition was filed for not complying with the court's prior directive regarding appointment approval and salary payment. The approval was originally granted but subsequently canceled by the third respondent contrary to a court order dated 7.3.2019.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the respondent fully complied with the previous order as certified in an affidavit, indicating the petitioner's arrears were paid amounting to Rs.14,93,017.

Issues: The primary issue was the compliance with the court's order of 04.10.2019 concerning the petitioner's appointment approval andsalary disbursement.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the necessity of adherence to its orders and acknowledged compliance with the previous order; thus, continuing the contempt proceedings would serve no useful purpose given the order's fulfillment.

Result: Contempt Petition disposed of; the respondent discharged from contempt proceedings.

Table of Content
1. non-compliance with court orders leads to contempt. (Para 1 , 3)
2. court satisfied with compliance; contempt proceedings discharged. (Para 2)
3. claim of contempt for disobedience of court orders. (Para 4)
4. affidavit of compliance fulfilled court’s directives. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
5. contempt proceedings concluded upon compliance. (Para 8)

ORDER :

(SHAMIM AHMED, J.)

This Contempt Petition has been filed to punish the contemnor/respondent for wilfully disobeying and not complying with the order of this Court passed in W.P(MD) No.18654 of 2019, dated 04.10.2019.

2. Heard Ms.A.Amala, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Sadiq Raja, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent.

3. This Court, vide judgment and order dated 04.10.2019, had disposed of the aforesaid writ petition with the following directions:-

“8. From the materials on record, it is seen that the appointment of the petitioner was approved, subject to the result of the Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.15334 of 2017, filed by the fifth respondent. This Court, by an order, dated 7.3.2019, directed the respondents to grant approval for appointment to the petitioner at the earliest. The third respondent instead of granting approval or ratifying the approval granted earlier, has cancelled the order of approval. The impugned order, cancelling the approval, is not only contrary to the order of this Court, dated 07.03.2019 in W.P(MD)No.15334 of 2017, but also in deliberate violation of the order of this Court. Unless the order of this Court, dated 7.3.2019, is set aside by a Division Bench or by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the third respondent is bound to obey the order of this Court and grant approval for appointment to the petitioner.

9. For the above reason, the impugned order passed by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.579/a2/2019, dated 14.08.2019, is quashed and the third respondent is directed to approve the appointment of the petitioner and release the salary to the petitioner together with arrears.

10. With the above observations, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. ”

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the judgment and order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.18654 of 2019, dated 04.10.2019, the respondent has not complied with the directions of this Court and has wilfully and deliberately flouted the order passed by this Court and is in contempt of the order of this Court dated 04.10.2019. Thus, he 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 respondent has filed an affidavit of compliance of the respondent, dated 08.07.2025, annexing a copy of the decision taken by the respondent, dated 29.09.2023, along with a copy of E.C.S. Date report for Annexure – II for the month of September, 2023, in which it has been stated that the direction issued by this Court, vide order dated 04.10.2019, in W.P.(MD) No.18654 of 2019 has been fully complied with and the arrear amount of Rs.14,93,017/- has already been paid to the petitioner. A copy of the compliance affidavit filed by the respondent, dated 08.07.2025 has been produced before this Court, which is now taken on record and a copy of the same has also been given to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Thus, he submits that the respondent may be discharged from the present contempt proceedings, as the judgment and order of this Court in W.P.(MD) No.18654 of 2019, dated 04.10.2019 has been fully complied with by the respondent, vide order dated 29.09.2023.

6. Ms.Amala, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she has received a copy of the compliance affidavit filed by the respondent, dated 08.07.2025, annexing a copy of the decision taken by the respondent dated 29.09.2023 along with a copy of E.C.S. Date report for Annexure – II for

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