J.Marshel Kumar v. Kumar And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23.07.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. SUNDAR CONTEMPT PETITION No. 1705 of 2023 J. Marshel Kumar ..Petitioner Vs.

1.

Mr. Kumar The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Union, Ootacamund.

Tmt. Banumathi The Joint Director, Local Fund Audit, 4th Floor, Kuralagam, Chennai - 600 108.

..Respondents Prayer:

Petition under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1970/71 to punish the respondents herein for the wilful disobedience of the order dated 17.02.2017 passed in W.P. No. 22354 of 2016. 1\4

For Petitioner ::

Mr.S.P. Sudalaiyandi For Respondents ::

Ms.C.Sangamithirai, Special Govt. Pleader for R1 Mr.P. Balathandayutham Special Govt. Pleader for R2

O R D E R

In the captioned matter, Mr.S.P. Sudalaiyandi, learned counsel for petitioner is before me in the Physical Court; Ms.C. Sangamithirai, learned Special Government Pleader for 1st respondent [Mr.Kumar, The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Union, Ootacamund] is before me on the 'VC' (VideoConferencing) platform and Mr.P. Balathandayutham, learned Special Government Pleader for 2nd respondent [Tmt. Banumathi, The Joint Director, Local Fund Audit, 4th Floor, Kuralagam, Chennai - 600 108] is before me in the Physical Court. To be noted, this is a hybrid hearing, which is a regular/routine/daily feature in this Court. All the aforementioned three learned counsel submit in one voice/in unison that order dated 17.02.2017 made in W.P. No. 22354 of 2\4

2016 has been duly and fully complied with. This common joint submission made by all the three learned counsel is recorded. 3.

As regards timeline qua 17.02.2017 order, learned Special Government Pleaders appearing on behalf of 1st and 2nd respondents submit that 1st and 2nd respondents tender unconditional apology and that the delay was neither wilful nor wanton but owing to time consumed in ferreting out the files and both learned counsel request to accept the apology of 1st and 2nd respondents.

4.

Considering the nature of the matter, facts and circumstances of the case and the trajectory the matter has taken, this Court is of the view that the unconditional apology deserves to be accepted.

1. Accepting the unconditional apology of 1st and 2nd respondents and recording the stated position of all three learned counsel that M. SUNDAR,J.

3\4

nv aforementioned order dated 17.02.2017 made in W.P. No. 22354 of 2016 has been complied with duly in entirety, captioned contempt petition is closed. Though obvious, it is made clear that both respondents now stand purged of contempt qua captioned contempt petition. 23.07.2024 nv 4\4