S.Vijaya Prapakaran, v. Mr. M.Sudarsan B.E., (Honor),

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

1. S.Vijaya Prapakaran, S/o. A.Selvaraj, 4/3516, East Street, Sathankulam Village, Ramanathapuram District - 623 536.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. Mr. M.Sudarsan B.E., (Honor), Chief Engineer (Personnel), Administrative Branch, 8th Floor, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., No. 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

Contemnor(s) PRAYER To punish the Respondent for willful disobedience of order dated 25.11.2024 passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No. 16685 of 2021 For Petitioner (s):

Mrs. Nalini chidambaram, Senior counsel for Mrs.C.Uma

For Respondent :

Mr. P. Muthukumar, AAG Assisted by Mr.K.Rajkumar, Senior Counsel

ORDER

This Contempt Petition is filed alleging wilful disobedience by not implementing the order dated 25.11.2024 passed in W.P.No.16685 of 2021.

2. Heard Mrs. Nalini Chidambaram, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P. Muthukumar, learned Addl. Advocate General assisted by Mr.K.Rajkumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.

3. On behalf of the petitioner, it is contended by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner that the respondent has not complied with the direction contained in the order of this Court, whereby, this Court, while holding that the respondent could not have appointed the 2 nd respondent under Inter Caste Marriage priority category, even though, he secured lesser marks and remanded the matter back to the respondent to consider the matter afresh by passing appropriate orders on its merits and in accordance with law, no

order has been passed till date and thus, the respondent has acted in wilful disobedience to the order of this Court.

4. Learned Addl. Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent, while disputing the aforesaid claim made on behalf of the petitioner, would submit that, on this court issuing the aforesaid direction, the respondent had filed a Writ Appeal and the same is pending consideration.

5. Learned Addl. Advocate General further submitted that not withstanding the fact that a Writ Appeal is preferred against the order in Writ Petition directing to consider the matter afresh, the respondent has passed an order vide Letter No.056320/G.19/G.191/2022-2, dated 24.06.2025 and communicated the aforesaid proceedings to the petitioner by sending the same through a registered post on 26.06.2025.

6. The learned Addl. Advocate General thus, submitted that the respondent authorities having passed an order afresh, as directed by this Court, the respondents have complied with the order of this Court and as such, they are not in contempt of the order, as alleged.

7. Learned Addl. Advocate General would further submit that if the petitioners are aggrieved by the aforesaid communication, whereby, the matter has been considered by the respondent, the petitioner has to avail further remedies by assailing the said order and cannot allege contempt.

8. I have taken note of the aforesaid submissions made.

9. Taking note of the fact that this Court while disposing of the Writ Petition having remitted the matter back to the respondent for considering the matter afresh and to pass an order and the respondent thereafter though had preferred a writ appeal, having passed the order dated 24.06.2025 and also communicating the said order to the petitioner by sending the same through Registered Post on 26.06.2025, this Court is of the view that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the aforesaid order, has to assail the same by availing appropriate remedy open to him in law.

10. Though this Court while disposing the writ petition had expressed that the selection of the 2 nd respondent to be contrary, in as much as, no positive

direction has been given therein, and the matter having been remitted back to the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner, denovo and the respondent having passed the order under letter dated 24.06.2025 and communicated their decision to the petitioner vide letter dated 24.06.2025, this court is of the view that there is sufficient compliance of the order of this Court and as such, it cannot be alleged that the respondent are in contempt of the order of this Court.

11. In view of the above, this Court is of the view, no case is made out for proceeding with the contempt case and accordingly, contempt petition is closed.

msr 12-09-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.Mr. M.Sudarsan B.E., (Honor), Chief Engineer (Personnel), Administrative Branch, 8th Floor, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., No. 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

T.VINOD KUMAR J.

msr 12-09-2025