← Library
Madras High CourtCONT P/1942/2025dismissed

Dr.L.Pravina Fernando, v. D.Karthikeyan, I.A.S., And Another

2025-06-26Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 26.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR Dr.L.Pravina Fernando ... Petitioner Vs.

1. D.Karthikeyan I.A.S, Secretary, Municipal Administration & Water Supplies Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 9. The State of Tamil Nadu.

2. J.Kumaragubaran, I.A.S, The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Building, Chennai - 3 ... Respondents Prayer: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondents for having committed contempt by violating the order dated 09.11.2023 passed in W.P.No.19563 of 2015.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kumaresan For R1 : Mr.M.Suresh Kumar, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.S.Rajesh, Government Advocate For R2 : Mr.M.Suresh Kumar, Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr.S.Gopinathan

O R D E R

This contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of the order dated 09.11.2023 passed by this court in W.P.No.19563 of 2015, whereby this court directed the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 26.02.2015.

2. As a matter of fact, the said representation was considered and an order was passed by the respondents as early as on 09.12.2024. A copy of the same is also filed along with the contempt petition.

3. On perusal of the said order, this court is convinced that the respondents have complied with the order passed by this court. However, it is

contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that there was a specific direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for payment of salary for 14 months in Paragraph No. 3 of the order passed by this court. On perusal of the said order dated 09.12.2024, it is noticed that the respondents have duly considered the said claim. Hence, this court does not find any reason to entertain this contempt petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. In case, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 09.12.2024, he is at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. No costs. 26.06.2025 skr Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.

skr

26.06.2025