Madras High CourtCONT P/571/2017closed

S.Ravikumar v. Dr.D.K.Senguttuvan

2018-08-16Honourable Mr Justice R.Subbiah3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.08.2018 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH Contempt Petition No.571 of 2017 S.Ravikumar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.Dr.D.K.Senguttuvan Director of Medical and Rural Health Services 9ESI)- (Incharge) DMS Compound Teynampet, Chennai-600 006.

2.Dr.Thirunavukarasu Hospital Superintendent-(Incharge) ESI Hospital Ayanavaram, Chennai-600 023.

... Respondents Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1971, to punish the respondents for wilfully and deliberately violating the order dated 11.11.2016 in W.P.No.29762 of 2015 passed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.Balan Haridas For Respondents : Mr.M.Elumalai, GA * * * * *

ORDER

This Court, while allowing the writ petition in W.P.No.29762 of 2015, by order dated 11.11.2016, directed the respondents to post the petitioner as Hospital Worker

in ESI Hospital, ayanavaram, Chennai, within a period of two weeks.

2.The present contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging non-compliance of the order dated 11.11.2016 passed by this Court.

3.Today, when the matter is taken up, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents, by producing a copy of the proceedings dated 11.05.2017 issued by the 1st respondent, submitted that the order passed by this Court has been duly complied with by the respondents, by allowing the petitioner to join duty at ESI Hospital, Ayanavaram, Chennai.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that on 08.09.2015, the petitioner was transferred from ESI Dispensary, Nagercoil, from ESI Hospital at Ayanavaram and that he has now been permitted to join duty only on 16.05.2017 at ESI Hospital at Ayanavaram; therefore, the intervening period has to be regularized.

5.However, this Court is of the opinion that the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be considered in this contempt petition. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved, he is at liberty to work out his remedy by way of independent proceedings, in the manner known to law.

6.Since the order of this Court has been complied with, nothing survives in this contempt petition and the same is accordingly closed.

SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES) ssv //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2019. COURT OFFICER(O.S.) from 25th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

PS/08/10/2018