Madras High CourtCONT P/544/2013closed

M.Baskar, And 38 Others v. Mr.Rajeev Ranjan, And 4 Others

2021-02-18Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 18.02.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Cont.P. No.544 of 2013 1.M.Baskar 2.S.Menaka 3.V.Mohan 4.R.Vasanthi 5.M.Mageswari 6.R.Kaveri 7.M.Devaraj 8.Samundeeswari 9.Y.Mythily 10.S.Nirmala 11.S.Vijay 12.B.Kannan 13.M.Raja 14.J.Chandru 15.B.Madankumar 16.S.Nandakumar 17.D.Subash 18.M.Karvannan 19.S.Shanthi 20.R.Anand 21.N.Veni 22.T.Vettri 23.N.Jayakumar 24.V.Poomagal 25.P.Divya 26.R.Sivakumar 27.R.Moorthy 28.N.Elangovan 29.K.Muniammal 30.V.Prema 31.K.Sarathy 32.N.Sagunthula 1/4

33.M.Rajasekar 34.C.Clara 35.S.Aishwarya 36.Thenmozhi 37.G.Karunanithi 38.S.Mahalakshmi 39.Susai Raj .. Petitioners Vs 1.Rajeev Ranjan Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Revenue Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.Jayasree Raghunathan, Commissioner, Land Reforms, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

3.Debenranath Swine, Commissioner, Land Administration, Land Reforms, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

4.Seetha Lakshmi, District Collector - In - Charge, Chennai District, Singaravelan Maligai, Chennai.

5.A.N.Gopi, Tahsildar, Mambalam Guindy Taluk, K.K.Nagar, Chennai - 600 078.

.. Respondents Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, praying to punish the above respondents 1 to 5 for contempt of the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P. Nos.5000 of 2011 dated 31.07.2012. 2/4

For Petitioners : Mr. B. Rabu Manohar For Respondents : 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 in W.P. Nos.5000 of 2011 dated 31.07.2012.

2. Learned counsel representing the petitioner's counsel on record has stated that the counsel on record has instructed her to inform before this Court that the contempt petition may be dismissed as infructuous.

3. This Court is able to see that the direction by this Court in the Writ Petition is to allot alternative sites of equivalent size to the petitioners within a period of four months. Since the counsel representing the petitioner's counsel on record, on instructions, reports that the contempt petition may be dismissed as infructuous, this Court is of the view that the contempt petition can be closed.

4. Accordingly, 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 2021. 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/04/06/2021 3/4

To 1.The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Revenue Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The Commissioner, Land Reforms, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

3.The Commissioner, Land Administration, Land Reforms, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

4.The District Collector - In - Charge, Chennai District, Singaravelan Maligai, Chennai.

5. The Tahsildar, Mambalam Guindy Taluk, K.K.Nagar, Chennai - 600 078.

4/4