M.I.Jaffar Ibrahim v. Anshul Misra And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.09.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR Contempt Petition No.1722 of 2023 M.I.Jaffar Ibrahim ... Petitioner vs.

J.Radhakrishnan The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ribbon Buildings, EVR Salai, Poonamallee High Road, Chennai - 600 003.

... Respondent PRAYER: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, praying to punish the respondent for willful disobedience of the order of this Court made in W.P.No.24740 of 2022 dated 15.09.2022. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Ullasavelan For Respondent : Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu Standing Counsel for GCC

O R D E R

The contempt petition is filed mainly on the ground that the 2nd respondent failed to comply with the directions issued by this Court in its order dated 15.09.2022 in W.P.No.24710 of 2022. 1/4

2. By the order passed in the main writ petition, the 2nd respondent was directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 25.05.2022 after hearing the petitioner and the 3rd respondent in the writ petition.

3. When the contempt petition is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent filed a status report wherein it was mentioned that after conducting detailed enquiry as directed, a final order was passed by the 2nd respondent after hearing the petitioner and 3rd respondent on 01.09.2023 and the same was also communicated to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent also produced a copy of the order dated 01.09.2023 along with postal receipt for sending the same to the petitioner.

4. It is further stated in the status report that there was some delay on the part of the 2nd respondent in disposing the representation as directed due to expansion of the Chennai Corporation and re-classification of zones and delay in disposal of the representation is not willful act of the 2nd respondent.

5. In view of the fact that the 2nd respondent already passed an order 2/4

dated 01.09.2023 disposing the representation submitted by the petitioner, after giving an opportunity to the petitioner as well as 3rd respondent, the contempt petition is closed.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner tried to assail the correctness of the order passed by the 2nd respondent. In the contempt proceedings, the petitioner is not entitled to challenge the correctness of the order passed by the 2nd respondent and the same has to be challenged in the manner known to law.

08.09.2023 Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No dm 3/4

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

dm 08.09.2023 4/4