S.Prameela, v. Tmt. Rashmi Siddharth Zagade And 3 Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 05.01.2026 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN S.Prameela ... Petitioner Vs.

1. Tmt.Rashmi Siddharth Zagade, The District Collector, 62, Rajaji Salai, Chennai - 600 001.

2. Mr.J.Kumaragurubaran, The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai - 600 003.

3. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Law & Order), B1, Police Station, Rajaji Salai, Chennai - 600 001.

(R3 suo motu impleaded as per order of this Court made in Cont.P.1645/2025 dt.05.12.2025)

4. The Principal Secretary to Government, Home Police Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

5. The Director general of Police Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004 (R4 & R5 suo motu impleaded as per order of this Court made in Cont.P.1645/2025 dt.09.12.2025) ... Respondents

Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondents for wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.32898 of 2017 dated 05.03.2024. For Petitioner : Mr.Vijayan Subramanian For Respondents : Mr.T.Arunkumar, Addl.G.P. for R1 and R4 Mr.M.Suresh kUmar, Addl.Advocate General assisted by Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu, Standing Counsel for GCC for R2 Mr.M.babu Muthu Meeran, Addl.Public Prosecutor for R3 & R5

O R D E R

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.

Contempt Petition has been instituted to punish the respondents for their wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.32898 of 2017 dated 05.03.2024.

2. One of the reasons stated by the Corporation authorities is that the police department failed to provide protection for eviction of encroachers, despite five letters sent to the police department by the Corporation for providing police assistance.

3. Lack of coordination between the corporation authorities and police department, resulted in filing the contempt proceedings. Thus, this Court directed the Director General of Police to examine the issues and respond to the contempt proceedings.

4. The Joint Commissioner of Police, North Zone, Greater Chennai

Corporation filed a status report stating that actions have been initiated against the police officers who have failed to respond to the letters sent by the Corporation. Departmental action has been initiated against the Inspector of Police under Rules 3(a) of the Tamil Nadu Police Disciplinary and Appeal Rules, vide office Punishment Roll No.01/PR.N-2 (1)/2026, for further action. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Harbour Range, also has been instructed to offer his explanation for his negligence in the matter of implementation of the orders of the Hon'ble High Court.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would contend that all suitable actions have been initiated against the police officers who all are responsible for non-coordination and for their lapses and negligence or dereliction of duty. The actions initiated will be concluded by following the procedures as contemplated under the rules.

6. In respect of the contempt proceedings, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the order of this Court has been complied with. Thus, no further adjudication is required, and the Contempt Petition stands closed.

(S.M.S.,J.) (C.K.,J.) 05.01.2026 vsi Index : Yes Speaking order : Yes

S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.

and C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

vsi 05.01.2026