J.Paranjothi Bagath Singh v. C.Rajendra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 31.01.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR CONT.P.No.1107 of 2014 J.Paranjothi Bagath Singh ..Petitioner Vs 1.C.Rajendra, Secretary/Chairman Adhoc School Committee, R.B.A.N.C Higher Secondary School, No.26, Swami Chetty Street, Komaleswaranpet, Chennai-2.
2.G.Mary James, B.T. Assistant (History) R.B.A.N.C Higher Secondary School, No.26, Swami Chetty Street, Komaleswaranpet, Chennai-2.
..Respondents Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Sections 11 of the Contempt of Courts act 1971 praying for punishing the respondents for willful disobedience of the stay order dated 25.11.2013 passed in M.P.No. 1 of 2013 in W.P.No. 32092 of 2013.
For Petitioner : No Appearance For Respondents : Mr.S.Ilamvaludhi - R1 No Appearance - R2
ORDER
The present contempt petition is filed to punish the respondents for willful disobedience of the interim order dated 25.11.2013 passed in M.P.No. 1 of 2013 in W.P.No. 32092 of 2013.
2. Today, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner and the 2nd respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the 1st respondent and perused the records.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/management has filed counter affidavit and in para 10 of the counter affidavit, it is stated that from 25.11.2013 to 06.03.2014, the petitioner has not taken any steps to move the matter to get it extended or to made the stay absolute.
4. In view of the above prima-facie is made out to entertain the contempt petition.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/Management has further submitted that subsequently, when the said petition came up before this Court on 07.03.2014, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and this Court has modified
the order of interim stay as status quo. The relevant portion of the said order of this Court is extracted below;
"There is no representation for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the private respondent has already joined and presently working as Headmistress.
Considering the submissions made, without going into the merits of the case, interim order granted on 25.11.2013 is modified to the effect that "there shall be an order of status quo as on today".
6. It is stated by the 1st respondent/management in the additional counter affidavit that based on the directions of the Joint Director of School Education dated 22.11.2010, the 1st respondent/management passed orders on 21.11.2013 and the 2nd respondent also assumed charge on 22.11.2013 and working as on today.
7. According to the 1st respondent, the 2nd respondent joined in the school management prior to the interim order passed by this Court i.e. On22.11.2013, but still the petitioner claims that he has not handed over the charge.
8. Recording the submissions made by the learned counsel for the 1st respondent/management and the statement made in the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent/management, the contempt petition stands closed. It is for the parties concerned to agitate the matter before
the appropriate forum, without prejudice to the orders passed in the present contempt petition.
SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES) ak //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2022. COURT OFFICER(O.S.) from 25th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format. Gs/26/04/2022