B.Narayanan v. E.P.Asha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 02.03.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Contempt Petition.No.1714 of 2014 B.Narayanan, S/o.V.Bakthavatsalu Naidu .. Petitioner Vs.
E.P.Asha, Tahsildar, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District.
.. Respondent Prayer:Contempt petitions filed under section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondent for her willful disobedience and negligence of the order dated 02.04.2013 made in W.P.No.8212 of 2013 of this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal For Respondent : Mr.M.Elumalai Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The Petitioner in the contempt petition filed a writ petition in W.P.No.8212/2013 for issuing a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to issue patta to the petitioner in his name in respect of his ancestral immovable property comprised in New Survey Nos.136/1 and 1/3
136/3 as per Natham Land Tax Scheme, Grama Natham old Survey No.136/1 of Nachichathiram Village, Nadukuthagai, Thiruninravur, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District, by favourably considering and disposing of the petitioner's latest representation dated 21.09.2012 within a stipulated time to be fixed by this Court.
2.This Court by order dated 02.04.2013 disposed of the writ petition in W.P.No. 8212/2013, in the following lines : ''Having regard to the facts of the case, I am inclined to direct the respondent herein to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 21.09.2012 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, after affording opportunity to the petitioner and others if any, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.'' 3.This contempt petition is filed alleging wilful disobedience of the order passed in W.P.No.6212/2013 dated 02.04.2013. 4.The learned counsel for the petitioner admitted that the respondent passed the order in the petitioner's representation dated 21.09.2012. He further submitted that the order is not on merits and the respondent has refused to grant patta.
5.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent, on instructions, states that the representation of the petitioner 2/3
dated 21.09.2012 was considered and an order dated 09.02.2016 has been passed by the Tashildar. He also produced the proceedings before this Court.
6. Since the representation of the petitioner has been considered and an order has been passed by the concerned official on 09.02.2016, the same is in compliance with the direction of this Court. Therefore, this Court does not find any disobedience, much less wilful disobedience, of the order passed in W.P.No.6212/2013 dated 02.04.2013.
7.Recording the submission of the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent reporting compliance, this Contempt Petition is closed. No Costs. It is open to the petitioner to challenge the order passed by the respondent dated 09.02.2016. SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES) tta //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2021. 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/27/07/2021 To The Tahsildar, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District.
3/3