N.Thangavel v. Dr.Himanshu Pathak

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.10.2024 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM N.Thangavel ... Petitioner Vs.

Dr.Himanshu Pathak, The Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture Research & Education, Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 001.

...Respondent

PRAYER: Contempt Proceedings initiated under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, to punish the respondent for wilful disobedience of the order passed in W.A.No.1510 of 2012 dated 02.07.2021. For Petitioner : Mr.P.R.Krishnaraj For Respondent : Mr.J.Madhanagopal Rao Senior Panel Counsel

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.) The present contempt Proceedings has been initiated to punish the respondent for wilful disobedience of the order passed in W.A.No.1510 of 2012 dated 02.07.2021.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the proposal sent by the appellate institute on 02.12.1999 for sanction of 182 posts was not materialised and thereafter, second proposal was submitted on 05.01.2019 with a request to sanction 66 posts, taking into account the appellant being a premier world renowned institution. 3.

Proposal of the order against which the contempt petition was filed would reveal that, a direction was issued to the 4th respondent therein, the Union of India, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture to consider the proposal sent by the appellate institute on two occasions. On first occasion, on 02.12.1999, requesting the 4th respondent to sanction of 182 posts and second proposal on 05.01.2019, requesting to sanction of 66

posts.

4.

Therefore, this Court has directed the 4th respondent therein to consider the proposal and pursuant to the direction, the 4th respondent considered the proposal.

5.

Mr.J.Madhanagopal Rao, learned Standing Panel Counsel would submit that the instruction sent by the respondent, would reveal that, the proposal sent by ICAR-SBI, Coimbatore on 02.12.1999 did not materialize and was subsumed in the second proposal sent on 05.01.2019 for creation of 182 posts.

6.

The respondent has considered the proposal and found the same could not be materialized. That being the factum, there is no willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.A.No.1510 of 2012 dated 02.07.2021.

7.

Consequently, the Contempt Petition is dismissed. [S.M.S., J.] [V.S.G., J.] 14.10.2024 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No gd To The Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture Research & Education, Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 001.

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

AND V.SIVAGNANAM, J.

gd 14.10.2024