A.P.Krishnasamy v. Dr. K.Manivasan, I.A.S.,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.06.2026
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA A.P.Krishnasamy
...Petitioner
Vs.
Dr.K.Manivasan, I.A.S., The Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
...Respondent
Contempt petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, seeking to punish the respondent for wilful disobedience of the order dated 04.09.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.33366 of 2025. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Bala For Respondent : Ms.A.Suganya, Government Counsel
ORDER
This contempt petition has been filed seeking to punish the respondent for wilful disobedience of the order dated 04.09.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.33366 of 2025.
1/4
2. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Government Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that this Court, vide order dated 04.09.2025 made in W.P.No.33366 of 2025, disposed of the said writ petition with a direction to the respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 27.05.2024 seeking grant of notional promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police on a par with his batch mates, and to pass appropriate orders within a period of twelve weeks. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the respondent considered the petitioner's representation and passed orders, vide proceedings dated 04.02.2026, in and by which the prayer of the petitioner was rejected.
3. Further, the learned Government Counsel produced a copy of the said proceedings dated 04.02.2026 to substantiate compliance. She also submitted that while the order under contempt has been complied with, there was admittedly a delay and that the said delay was neither wilful nor wanton, but was occasioned solely due to administrative reasons, for which she tendered an unconditional and sincere apology, praying that the respondent may be purged of the contempt proceedings and the charges be dropped 2/4
4. In response, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner may be granted liberty to challenge the said order dated 04.02.2026 in the manner known to law.
5. Though there had been some delay in complying with the order of this Court, in view of the above submission made by the learned Government Counsel and the sincere apology tendered by her, this Court finds it unnecessary to continue with the contempt proceedings against the respondent and accordingly, this contempt petition stands closed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the said order dated 04.02.2026 and work out his remedy in the manner known to law, if he is so advised.
11.06.2026 skt 3/4
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
skt 11.06.2026 4/4