S.Jagannathan v. Mr.K.Gagandeepsingh Bedi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.04.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN Contempt Petition No.78 of 2018 S.Jagannathan, 61/22, Kollaimettu Street, Kalaval Post, Arcot Taluk, Vellore District.
.. Petitioner Vs.
1.Mr.Gagandeep Singh Bedi Secretary to Government Government of Tamil Nadu Agriculture Department Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.Mr.S.J.Siru Chief Executive Officer Tamil Nadu State Agricultural Marketing Board Thiru.Vi.Ka Industrial Estate CIPET Road, Guindy Chennai - 600 032.
3.Mr.R.P.Jayakumar Assistant Secretary Tamil Nadu State Agricultural Marketing Board Thiru.Vi.Ka Industrial Estate CIPET Road, Guindy Chennai - 600 032.
4.Mr.K.Arulalagan Assistant Executive Engineer Tamil Nadu State Agricultural Marketing Board Vellore Sub Division 20, Lakshmi Nivas Nilayam New Sankaranpalayam Road Vellore.
.. Respondents Prayer : Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, to punish the respondents for their wilful disobedience of the order dated 2.2.2017 passed in W.P.No.2514 of 2017.
For Petitioner .. Mr.K.Venkatesan For Respondents .. Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan [R2]
ORDER
It is represented that in compliance of the order passed in W.P.No.2514 of 2017, which is the subject matter of contempt, the Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government, Agriculture Department, Chennai-9, vide letter No.29693/AM.1(2)/2013-25 dated 23.03.2018, had sent a communication to the Government Pleader, enclosing a copy of the communication addressed to the Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu State Agricultural Marketing Board, Chennai-32, wherein, the claim of the petitioner has been rejected. The said copy has also been served on the petitioner on 27.03.2018, pursuant to which, the respondent has raised objections in writing. The acknowledgement for having received the proceedings and copy of his written objection has also been produced before this Court.
2. Though the learned counsel appearing for the respondents has drawn the attention of this Court to paragraph No.10 of the proceedings dated 23.3.2018 and would submit that the only reason assigned as to the alleged absence of the petitioner between 05.1.1995 to 08.12.1996, and 01.11.2003 to 18.11.2005, is as to the non-availability of medical records, it appears that the remarks called for by the first respondent from the Chief Executive Officer Tamil Nadu Sate Agricultural Marketing
Board would reveal the said individual has not attended the duty during the said spell and no duty pay was paid to him during the said period.
3. In the light of Paragraph No.10 of the said proceedings, this Contempt Petition is closed. However, if the petitioner is so advised, he is always at liberty to challenge the proceedings dated 23.03.2018, in accordance with law, before the competent forum.
SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES) ds //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. Sm/07/05/2019