Rangasamy v. Mr. Ravichanderan And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN Rangasamy .. Petitioner Vs 1.Mr.Ravichandran Block Development Officer Block Development Office Karamadai, Mettupalayam Taluk Coimbatore 641 104 2.Mr.Rangaraj President/Secretary Illuppanatham Village Mettupalayam Taluk Coimbatore 641 302 .. Respondents Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondent for having committed contempt of the orders of this Court dated 11.03.2025 passed in W.P.No.8353 of 2025. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Gangadaran For Respondents : Mr.R.Kumaravel Additional Government Pleader 1/4

O R D E R

By an order dated 11.03.2025, Mr.Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana had directed the respondents 3 and 4 to afford an opportunity to the petitioner as well as respondents 6 and 7 therein and pass appropriate orders.

2. When the matter was called last occasion, the contemnor produced a copy of the proceedings dated 09.10.2025, stating that a decision on the request made by the contempt petitioner/writ petitioner will be considered, after the disposal of the suit in O.S.No.501 of 2012 pending on the file of the District Munsif Court at Mettupalayam.

3. Finding that the order had been complied with a considerable delay, I called upon the Block Development Officer to file an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay. He has filed an affidavit stating that on account of the implementation of various social welfare schemes brought by the Government of Tamil Nadu, he was not in a position to comply with the orders in time. The explanation is absolutely fictitious and unbelievable. It is the duty of the Block Development Officer to implement the Government Schemes, at the same time, he 2/4

has to implement the orders of the Court. It is not left open to him to pick and choose the orders to comply with. The explanation offered is rejected. As the contemnor has tendered an unconditional apology, it is accepted. It is left open to the petitioner to challenge the impugned order, if he so desires. Recording the same, this contempt petition is closed. 24.10.2025 gya Index : Yes/No 3/4

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

gya 24.10.2025 4/4