Dr. P. Subramanian v. Thiru. Selvi Apoorva, I.A.S., And 2 Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 03.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR Cont.P. No.1289 of 2025 P.Subramanian .. Petitioner Vs.

1.Thiru.V.Dakshinamoorthy, I.A.S., The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Agriculture Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600009.

2.Thiru.Anand, The Director of Local Fund Audit, Integrated Complex for Finance Department 4th Floor, Animal Husbandry Hospital Campus, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 035.

3.R.Thamizh Vendan The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, University Campus, Coimbatore - 3.

.. Respondents Prayer: Contempt petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Court Act, 1971, to punish the respondents herein for committing contempt of Court for not obeying the order passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.25869 of 2013 dated 25.04.2024.

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Soundar Raj 1/4

For R1 & R2 : Mr.V.Nanmaran Additional Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.R.Sivakumar assisted by Mr.S.Manikandan

ORDER

This contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of the order dated 25.04.2024 passed in W.P.No.25869 of 2013, whereby this Court directed the respondents to provide all incentive as per para 4 of G.O.Ms.No.270 dated 18.10.2010 as per the eligibility of the petitioner. 2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner was granted incentive on paper, no arrears were paid. Hence, the respondents are liable to be punished for contempt. 3.

A perusal of the order dated 25.04.2024 passed by this Court especially at para 9 indicate that this Court has made a categorical observation that G.O.Ms.No.270 does not speak about issuance of any arrears. If that be the case, this Court is unable to appreciate the contention of the petitioner. 4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents have committed contempt of the order passed by this Court, as they have not extended the benefit in terms of para 3 of G.O.Ms.No.270, dated 2/4

18.10.2010. However, the respondents, having considered the claim of the petitioner pursuant to the orders passed by this Court, issued proceedings No.ALO/TNAU/Dr.P.S/2025 dated 30.06.2025 and a copy of the same is also placed before this Court and also communicated to the petitioner. Further, it is also relevant to note that this Court has not issued any positive direction, but whatever the benefit that is directed to be extended to the petitioner is in terms of para 4 of G.O.Ms.No.270 dated 18.10.2010 as per the eligibility of the petitioner. If that be the case, this Court is unable to see any violation of the order passed by this Court especially in the context of the proceedings dated 30.06.2025.

5.

In the circumstances, this contempt petition is closed. However, it is made clear that in case if the petitioner has got any grievance against the proceedings dated 30.06.2025, it is open for the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordance with law.

03.07.2025 dpa Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR ,J.

dpa 3/4

03.07.2025 4/4