Velayutham v. Rohini Ias
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.12.2017 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY Contempt Petition No.1727 of 2017 in W.M.P.No.26047 of 2017 in W.P.No.24686 of 2017 Velayutham ... Petitioner Vs.
1.Ms.Rohini, I.A.S., The District Collector, Salem District, Salem.
2.Ms.Chitra, The Tahsildar, Omalur Taluk, Omalur, Salem District.
3.Mr.Arul Jothiarasan, The Project Officer, Salem District Rural Development Agency, Collectorate, Salem.
4.Mr.Gopinath, The Assistant Director, Panchayat, Salem District, Salem.
5.Ms.Manimegalai, The Commissioner / Block Development Officer, Omalur Panchayat Union, Omalur, Salem District.
6.Mr.Arul, The District Divisional Engineer, Construction of Amma Park, Pachanampatty Village & Post, Omalur Taluk, Salem District.
7.Mr.Saravanan, The Inspector of Police, Omalur Police Station, Omalur, Salem District.
... Respondents Prayer : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondents for the disobedience of the orders passed by this Court in W.M.P.No.26047 of 2017 in W.P.No.24686 of 2017, dated 14.9.2017.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.R.Jothimanian For Respondents : Mr.R.Rajeswaran Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
By order dated 14.9.2017, this Court directed the respondents to maintain status quo in the application filed by the petitioner seeking for
interim injunction, restraining the respondents and their subordinates from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property by way of any construction of buildings or in any other manner in S.No.59/11, measuring an extent of 771⁄2 cents, situated at Pachanampatty Village, Omalur Taluk, Salem District, pending disposal of the writ petition.
2. The petitioner has come forward with the present contempt petition to punish the respondents for the disobedience of the order dated 14.9.2017, stating that the respondents are proceeding with the construction. Further, it was contented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even after the order of status quo granted by this Court on 12.10.2017, the respondents proceeded with the construction and stopped construction only after the issuance of contempt notice on 12.10.2017.
3. The first respondent District Collector, Salem has filed an affidavit dated 07.12.2017 before this Court, stating that the order dated 14.9.2017 shall be implemented in letter and spirit and no further developmental activity is carried on till date. Further, the District Collector, Salem had regretted and also tendered unqualified apology for not
implementing the order dated 14.9.2017 immediately. Further, the District Collector had also stated that this Court may graciously be pleased to accept the unconditional apology and exonerate from the purview of the contempt proceedings.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondents are not proceeding with the construction after 12.10.2017.
5. In view of the averments stated in the affidavit filed by the District Collector, Salem, I do not find any reason to keep the contempt petition pending. The petitioner is at liberty to prosecute the writ petition before the concerned Hon'ble Judge.
In these circumstances, the contempt petition stands closed.
08.12.2017 Index : Yes/No Speaking /Non-speaking order ms/Rj
M.DURAISWAMY,J.
ms Contempt Petition No.1727 of 2017 in W.M.P.No.26047 of 2017 in W.P.No.24686 of 2017 08.12.2017