S.Sattanathan v. Hans Raj Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.07.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH Contempt Petition No.562 of 2020 S.Sattanathan
...Petitioner/Petitioner
vs.
1. Hans Raj Verma, I.A.S State of Tamil Nadu, Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009
2. Dr. K.S.Palanisamy,I.A.S The Director of Rural Development & Panchayat Raj, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015 ..Respondents / Respondents PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondents for committing contempt of Court by wilful disobedience of orders of this Court in WP No.16329 of 2019 dated 13.02.2020.
For Petitioner : Mrs.M.Kavitha For Respondent : Mr.R.Neelakandan Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr. A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader
ORDER
Pursuant to the earlier orders passed by this Court on 08.04.2022, the matter was posted for hearing today. 2.
A report has been filed by the 1st respondent and the relevant portions in the report are extracted hereunder :-
7. It is submitted that the Selection Committee conducted the interview and assessment of candidates on 5.5.2022 starting at 3.30 P.M. and concluded at 6.30 P.M. at Secretariat.
8. It is submitted that the Selection Committee assessment has concluded that both the Candidates Thiru S.Sattanathan and Thiru.M.Sakkarapani are not suitable for the post of Director, SASTA as they have failed to get minimum marks required as per assessment done by the consensus of the Committee recorded in its proceedings.
9. It is submitted that the orders of this Hon'ble Court have been complied with by proceeding with the 2nd notification. The Selection Committee proceeded the assessment process of 2nd Notification and concluded the same by recording it in the proceedings relating for the post of Director, SASTA.
10. It is submitted that in the order dated 8.4.2022, of this Hon'ble Court observed that ultimately, depending upon the final result of
the Selection Committee, further course of action can be adopted by the Respondents. Since, no candidate is selected by the Selection Committee, a fresh Notification for selection shall be made in accordance with Annual Master Circular 2021-22 of MGNREGA imbibing the latest amendment in selecting the Director SASTA before 30.6.2022, as per the observation made by this Hon'ble Court.
3.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the selection committee all of a sudden brought in a minimum marks criteria which was not even contemplated under the Notification and the whole effort was to ensure that no candidates are selected to the post of Director SASTA and to continue running it with the help of I.A.S. Officers. 4.
The petitioner may be having a genuine greivance on the result of the selection and the continuation of the IAS officers manning the post of Director/SASTA. However, this Court has already stretched this contempt petition to the maximum and it will not be appropriate for this Court to now go into the legality or otherwise of the non-selection of the petitioner. Such a process will be well beyond the scope of this contempt petition.
5.
In view of the above, if the petitioner is aggrieved by his non-selection, it is left open to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law. No further orders can be passed in this contempt petition and accordingly, the same is closed. 08.07.2022 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order rka To The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
rka Cont P No.562 of 2020 08.07.2022