Perumayee v. Jeevarathinam

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.02.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Cont.P. No.196 of 2013 1.Perumayee 2.Veerammal .. Petitioners Vs Jeevarathinam Secretary to Government, Department of Adi-Dravidar and Social Welfare, Secretariat, Chennai - 9.

.. Respondent Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, praying to punish the respondents for wilful disobedience of the order dated 11.10.2011 made in W.P. No.22838 of 2011 passed by this Honourable Court For Petitioners : Mr. N.Manokaran For Respondent : Mr. M.Elumalai Additional Government Pleader O R D E R This contempt petition is filed alleging wilful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 11.10.2011 made in W.P. No.22838 of 2011. 1/3

2. This Court, by order dated 11.10.2011, directed the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner. It turns out that the representation of the petitioner is to the effect that the respondent should acquire a specific land under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Lands for Harijan Welfare Scheme Act (Act 31 of 1978) for providing house site to the residents of a village known as Modikadu, Kasthuripatti Village, Sankari Taluk, Salem District. As a matter of fact the land was sought to be acquired by issuing notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. However, it is stated the acquisition proceeding was quashed at the instance of land owners.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners states that a fresh representation was once again given to acquire the land as the acquisition proceeding was quashed on a technical ground. It is further stated the writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the subsequent notification was also disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner.

4. It may open to the petitioners to pursue their remedies which were preserved by this Court in the earlier order of writ petition filed by the petitioners. The order which is the basis of this Contempt Petition cannot be enforced in view of the subsequent developments.

5. Having regard to the facts stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner this Court is of the view that the prayer in the Writ Petition itself has become 2/3

infructious and hence no useful purpose will be served by keeping the contempt petition pending. Hence this Contempt Petition is closed. No costs. SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES) bkn //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2022. COURT OFFICER(O.S.) from 25th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

GS/20/05/2021 To The Secretary to Government, Govt. of Tamil Nadu, Department of Adi-Dravidar and Social Welfare, Secretariat, Chennai - 9.

3/3