Madras High CourtCONT P/2342/2016closed

S.Henry Christyraj, v. Thiru Phanindrareddy Ias.,

2016-11-03Honourable Mr Justice T.Raja3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03.11.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA Contempt Petition No.2342 of 2016 S.Henry Christyraj ..

Petitioner -vsThiru.Phanindrareddy I.A.S., Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 9.

Respondent Petition under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the respondents for not obeying the order of this Court in W.P.No.9433 of 2016, dated 14.03.2016.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Raja for Mr.N.Kolandaivelu For Respondent : Mr.K.Venkataramani, AAG Assist. By Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, Spl.GP

ORDER

Heard Mr.K.Raja, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkataramani, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent.

2. The prayer of the petitioner in the writ petition was to quash the Government Order passed by the first respondent / Principal Secretary, Municipal

Administration and Water Supply Department, Chennai, in G.O.(3D) No.22, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (TP1) Department, dated 28.10.2015, in so far as it treats the petitioner as a fresh candidate and consequently to direct the respondents 1 and 2 therein to restore the seniority as per para 6 of G.O.Ms.No.118, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (TP1) Department, dated 21.08.2007 and then to include his name in the State level seniority list of Executive Officer Grade II/Head Clerk/Assistant in the panel for the year 2008-2009.

3. This Court, by order dated 14.03.2016, without going into the merits of the matter, directed the respondents 1 and 2 therein to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 18.02.2016 on merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, in the light of the directions issued in paragraph 6 of the G.O.Ms.No.118, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (TP1) Department, dated 21.08.2007, within a specified time limit.

4. In obedience to the above said order of this Court, the respondent has also passed a speaking order, vide his letter No.9038/Peru.1/2016-1, dated 04.07.2016, rejecting the case of the petitioner.

5. In view of the above, since the order dated

14.03.2016 of this Court directing the respondent only to consider the representation of the petitioner on merits and in accordance with law and in the light of the paragraph 6 G.O.Ms.No.118, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (TP1) Department, dated 21.08.2007, has been complied with by the respondent in passing a speaking order vide his proceedings dated 04.07.2016, nothing survives for further adjudication in the present contempt petition filed by the petitioner. Thus, the contempt petition stands closed. No Costs. It is for the petitioner to work out his further remedy in the manner known to law.

SD/- JOINT REGISTRAR(OS) rkm //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2017. COURT OFFICER(O.S.) from 25th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

SS/CO/04/01/2017 one cc to the Govt.Pleader, High Court,sr.No.14345/16