G.Selvaraj v. M.Rajendran, Ias
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.09.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN 1.
G.Selvaraj 2.
A.Devakumar M.P.Kumar A.Arumugam M.Madhurai Muthu 6.
P.Natrajan ... Petitioners vs.
1.
M.Rajendran, I.A.S, Commissioner of Agriculture Engineering Department, Chepauk, Chennai - 5.
2.
M.Senthil, Chief Engineer, Agricultural Engineering, Chennai - 600 035.
T.Sekar, Joint Director of Agriculture Department, Villupuram, Villupuram District.
U.Pandian, Assistant Executive Engineer, Agriculture Engineering Department, Villupuram, Villupuram District.
K.Rasu, Deputy Director of Horticulture, Villupuram, Villupuram District.
... Respondents Page No.1 of 4
Contempt Petition filed under Order 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, praying to punish the Respondents herein for willfully disobeying the order of this Court in W.P.No.27780 of 2010, dated 16.12.2010. For Petitioners :
Mr.Kumar for Mr.M.Ravi For Respondents :
Mr.M.Elumalai, Additional Government Pleader
O R D E R
This Contempt Petition is filed alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 16.12.2010 passed by this Court in W.P.No.27780 of 2010.
2. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, it is represented by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents that, the order under contempt was challenged in W.A.No.1241 of 2012 and the same was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court and that, a Review Petition filed against the same is pending. In view of the submissions of the learned Additional Government Pleader, Contempt will not lie against the order passed in the Writ Petition.
In the case of Kunhayammed vs. State of Kerala, reported in (2000 (6) SCC 359), the principle of Doctrine of Merger has been widely discussed by the Apex Court. With reference to the three-Judge ruling in Kunhayammed case and yet another decision of the Apex Court in the case of Dineshan, K.K. vs. R.K.Singh reported in (2014) 16 SCC 88, this Court Page No.2 of 4
is of the view that, once the order passed in a Writ Petition gets merged with the order of the Writ Appeal, the remedy available to the petitioner is to file a Contempt in the Writ Appeal and not in the Writ Petition, unless and until the Apex Court specifically directs the High Court to decide the issue. Thus, in view of the principle of Doctrine of Merger discussed above, the present Contempt Petition cannot be adjudicated and hence, it is closed. However, if the Petitioners are aggrieved, it is open to them to work out their remedy in the manner known to law. SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES) aeb/jas //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2020. COURT OFFICER(O.S.) from 25th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.
SMI/06/11/2020 To 1.
The Commissioner of Agriculture Engineering Department, Chepauk, Chennai - 5.
Page No.3 of 4
2.
The Chief Engineer, Agricultural Engineering, Chennai - 600 035.
The Joint Director of Agriculture Department, Villupuram, Villupuram District.
The Assistant Executive Engineer, Agriculture Engineering Department, Villupuram, Villupuram District.
The Deputy Director of Horticulture, Villupuram, Villupuram District.
Page No.4 of 4