Shanthi v. Ashokannt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR Cont.P .N o.3492 of 20 Shanthi

...Petitioner

Vs.

Ashokan The Commissioner (Corporation Commissioner) Tirupattur Municipality Tirupattur Town & Taluk Vellore District.

...Respondent

Prayer: This Contempt Petition is filed Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondent for disobeying the order of this Court dated 13.06.2022 passed in W.P.No.538 of 2018. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.T.Balaji For Respondent(s): Mrs.Y.Kavitha Additional Government Pleader 1/6

ORDER

This Contempt Petition is filed to punish the respondent for disobeying the order of this Court dated 13.06.2022 passed in W.P.No.538 of 2018.

2. The order copy was uploaded on the High Court website/portal thereafter. The petitioner however, applied for certified copy of the order on 19.12.2023 nearly after one year and the same was made ready on 08.01.2024 and delivered on 09.01.2024.

3. Though on behalf of the petitioner, it is contended that despite this Court directing the second respondent/Municipality to consider the request of the petitioner dated 05.12.2017 and to disburse the Death-cumretirement benefits payable to the deceased employee based on the Lok Adalat Award dated 31.07.2013, made in OS.No.17 of 2013 by the Taluk Legal Services Committee, Tirupathur at Vellore District, to both the petitioner as well as the third respondent by inviting them by sending separate notices to them in order to give quietus to the matter within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, the 2/6

respondents did not comply with the order and have wilfully disobeyed the order.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite the petitioner following up the matter with the respondents, the respondents kept the issue pending and as such, the petitioner was constrained to file the present contempt case on 21.10.2024.

5. I have taken note of the aforesaid submission made on behalf of the petitioner.

6. At the outset, it is to be noted that Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 prescribes the limitation of one year for initiating contempt proceedings.

7. This Court by order dated 28.11.2025 in Cont.P.Nos.2599 and 3033 of 2025 and by order dated 12.09.2025 in Cont.P.No.2706 of 2025 had considered the scope of Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short 'Act 1971') and Article 215 of the Constitution of India, and also as to what would constitute continuing cause of action. 3/6

8. This Court having regard to the law declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of S.Tirupathi Rao V. M.Lingamaiah and others reported in 2024 SCC online 1764, has held that Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, being a specific provision, the contempt petition has to be filed within one year when the cause of action arises.

9. In the facts of the present case, the cause of action for the petitioner to initiate action for contempt had arisen on expiry of two months time granted by this Court from the date of receipt of a copy of the order dated 13.06.2022. The petitioner not only did not take steps thereafter within time prescribed under the Contempt of Courts Act, but remained silent for a considerable length of time and approached this Court by filing the present contempt case nearly two years later.

10. Having regard to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court as noted herein above, the present contempt petition cannot be entertained, having been filed beyond the limitation prescribed under the Act, 1971.

4/6

11. Accordingly, this Contempt Petition is dismissed. However, it is open for the petitioner to work out her remedy, if so advised, in the manner known to law.

25.06.2026 Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No dna 5/6

T.VINOD KUMAR , J.

dna Cont.P .No.3492 of 2024 25.06.2026 6/6