Kather Ali v. Dr.M.Sai Kumar, Ias

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20.02.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR Cont.P.No.

of 202 Kather Ali Son of T.M.Anwar Ali 90, TVN Road, Ulundurpet Taluk, Kallakurichi District.

... Petitioner vs

1. Dr.M.Sai Kumar, IAS The Commissioner of Revenue Administration and Disaster Management, Ezhilagam, Chennai.

2. Thiru.Prasanth M S, I.A.S., The District Collector, Villupuram District.

... Respondents Prayer: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondents herein for the wilful disobedience of the orders of the Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.14238 of 2023 order dated 01.06.2023.

For Petitioner : Ms.R.Poornima For Respondents : Mrs.V.Yamunadevi Special Government Pleader 1/6

O R D E R

This Contempt Petition is filed alleging willful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 01.06.2023 in W.P.No.14238 of 2023.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents and perused the records.

3. A co-ordinate bench of this Court while disposing of the aforesaid W.P.No.14238 of 2023, directed as under:- "4. In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction to the second and third respondents herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.11.2022 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the claim made by the petitioner and that it is open to the respondents to consider the same on its own merits."

4. Though on behalf of the petitioner, it is contended that despite this Court directing the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 03.11.2022 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy 2/6

of the order, the respondents did not comply with the order and have willfully disobeyed the order by not disposing the representation.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite the petitioner following up the matter with the respondents, the respondents kept the issue pending and as such, the petitioner was constrained to file the present contempt case on 21.01.2026.

6. I have taken note of the aforesaid submission made on behalf of the petitioner.

7. At the outset, it is to be noted that Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 prescribes the time limitation of one year for initiating contempt proceedings.

8. This Court by order dated 01.06.2023 in Cont.P.Nos.2599 & 3033 of 2025 and Cont.P.No.2706 of 2025 had considered the scope of Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act and Article 215 of the Constitution of India, and also as to what would be constitute continuing cause of action. 3/6

9. This Court having regard to the law declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, being a specific provision, the contempt petitions have to be filed within one year when the cause of action arises.

10. In the facts of the present case, the cause of action for the petitioner to file a petition had arisen on expiry of eight weeks granted by this Court from the date of receipt of a copy of the order dated 01.06.2023. The petitioner not only did not take any action thereafter within time prescribed under the Contempt of Courts Act, and on the other hand had approached this Court by filing the present contempt case nearly 2 1⁄2 years later.

11. Having regard to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court, this Court is of the view, this contempt petition cannot be entertained. Accordingly, this Contempt Petition is dismissed. 20.02.2026 dh 4/6

To

1. Dr.M.Sai Kumar, IAS The Commissioner of Revenue Administration and Disaster Management, Ezhilagam, Chennai.

2. Thiru.Prasanth M S, I.A.S., The District Collector, Villupuram District.

5/6

T. VINOD KUMAR , J.

dh 20.02.2026 6/6