Cont.P.No.2748 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 22.11.2023

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

Cont.P.No.2748 of 2023

R.Ramasubramanian

S/o.Ramadoss

...Petitioner

-Vs-

1. Thiru Sathyamoorthy

Chief Engineer,

Public Works Department (General),

Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

2. Dr.Sandeep Saxena, IAS,

Secretary to Government,

Public Works Department,

Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.

… Respondents

Prayer : Contempt Petition under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts

Act, 1971 to punish the respondents for committing contempt of the

order of this Court dated 22.02.2021 made in W.P.No.18431 of 2008.

For Petitioner

: Mr.C.Karthik

For Respondents : Mr.Vadivelu Dheenadayalan

Additional Government Pleader

1/9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Cont.P.No.2748 of 2023

ORDER

This contempt petition has been filed for the alleged disobedience

of the orders of this Court dated 22.02.2021 made in W.P.No.18431 of

2008.

2. In the said order, in the operative portion this Court passed the

following order:

“49. In the result, the following orders are passed in

this writ petition:

(i) that the impugned order is sustained, therefore the

writ petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, it is

dismissed.

(ii) However, in view of the peculiar circumstances,

which has been discussed above, there shall be a direction

to the respondents, i.e., the Disciplinary Authority, to

review the punishment by deciding the Review Petition

already filed by the petitioner and while reviewing the same

by taking a pragmatic view with equity, the Disciplinary

Authority shall pass an order deciding to give a reduced

punishment to the petitioner.

(iii) The needful as indicated above shall be

undertaken by the Disciplinary Authority, within a period

of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

2/9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Cont.P.No.2748 of 2023

order and in this context, the petitioner is directed to send a

copy of this order along with the copy of the review

petition, which has already been filed and it is stated to be

pending before the Department, within a period of two

week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

50. With the above direction, this writ petition is

dismissed. No costs.”

3. Pursuant to the said order, the respondent has reviewed the

punishment of dismissal of service inflicted against the petitioner and

passed a revised order vide letter dated 08.05.2023, which reads thus:

“I am directed to invite your attention to the

references cited and to state that the Hon'ble Court in its

order dated 22.02.2021 had directed the respondent to pass

an order imposing a reduced punishment than that passed

in the Government Order first cited. Based on the said

order of the Hon'ble Court, the punishment of 'removal

from service' imposed on Thiru R.Ramasubramanian,

formerly Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Department

in the Government order first cited had been modified as

'compulsory retirement' in the Government order third

cited, for the charges held proved in the disciplinary

proceedings against him, which is a reduced punishment as

indicated by the Hon'ble Court, for the said punishment

3/9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Cont.P.No.2748 of 2023

would enable the individual to receive his pension and

Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity which would be fixed as

per Rule 39 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 after

regulating the period of suspension undergone by him.”

4. Despite this order having been passed, it is a contention of

Mr.C.Karthik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the orders

of this Court has not been complied with or it has been violated or there

has been willful disobedience of the orders of this Court, therefore, on

the alleged ground of non-compliance of the orders of this Court, this

contempt petition has been moved.