N.Nachiappan And 12 Others v. Mr. Ramesh Krishnamurthi And 4 Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15.10.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA Cont.P.No.3347 of 2025

1. N. Nachiappan

2. R. Rajendran

3. John B.S. Demel

4. Sekar Ramalingam

5. A. Arumugam Pillai

6. Vivekanandan Radhakrishnan

7. R. Selvaraj

8. Sharana Gowda

9. B. A. Venkatachalapathy

10. R. Ramakanth

11. G. Vivekanandan

12. B. Veerababu

13. K. Diwakar ... Petitioners Vs.

1. Mr.Ramesh Krishnamurthi, The Central Provident Fund Commissioner, No.14, Bikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066.

2. Mr.Chandramouli Chakaraborthy, The Additional Central Provident Fund Commissioner (Pension), No.14, Bikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066.

3. Mr.Pankaj Raman, The Additional Central Provident Fund Commissioner,

4. Ms.Sudha Vanamali,

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II (PoHW),

5. Mr.Sundaresan, The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, N.G.O. 'B' Colony, Tirunelveli - 627 007.

... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to take cognizance of the contempt committed by the respondents of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.25195 of 2019, dated 26.08.2019 and orders passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 04.11.2022 in SLP (Civil) Nos. 8658 to 8659 of 2019 and orders passed by this Court in W.A.No.4253 of 2019, dated 07.02.2024 and punish them in accordance with law. For Petitioners : Mr.V.Karthick Senior Counsel for Ms.Vedavallikumar For Respondents : Mr.R.Vishnu

O R D E R

When the contempt petition was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the respondents objected to the maintainability of the contempt petition by relying on the orders passed by this Court in Contempt Petition No.570 of 2020, dated 02.09.2020 and Contempt Petition No.68 of 2020, dated 01.07.2021. On the strength of the above orders, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that since the learned Single Judge's order was modified by the Division Bench, the same merged with the order passed in the Writ Appeal and therefore, the contempt petition could be filed only before the Division Bench.

2.

The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that originally the contempt petition was filed before the Division Bench but because of the objection raised by the Registry, it was filed before this Court. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners therefore prayed that this Court may post this contempt petition before the Division Bench. 3.

I find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents that the contempt petition is not maintainable before this Court, since this Court's order stands merged with the modified order in writ appeal. 4.

Hence, this Contempt Petition is closed. The petitioners are at liberty to file contempt petition before the Division Bench. No costs. 15.10.2025 srm Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order

N.MALA,J.

srm To

1. Mr.Ramesh Krishnamurthi, The Central Provident Fund Commissioner, No.14, Bikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066.

2. Mr.Chandramouli Chakaraborthy, The Additional Central Provident Fund Commissioner (Pension), No.14, Bikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066.

3. Mr.Pankaj Raman, The Additional Central Provident Fund Commissioner,

4. Ms.Sudha Vanamali, The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II (PoHW),

5. Mr.Sundaresan, The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, N.G.O. 'B' Colony, Tirunelveli - 627 007.

Cont.P. No.3347 of 2025 15.10.2025