Jagadeesan, v. Thiru. Joseph Diaz And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR Jagadeesan ... Petitioner(s) Vs.

1. Thiru Joseph Diaz, The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Coimbatore) Ltd., No.37, Mettupalayam Road, Coimbatore - 641 043.

2. Thiru Sivakumar, The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Coimbatore) Ltd., No.37, Mettupalayam Road, Coimbatore - 641 043.

... Respondent(s) Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act for the non-compliance of the order dated 21.12.2024 passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.33274 of 2012.

For Petitioner(s) : No appearance For Respondent(s) : Mr.Murali Vinoth

O R D E R

This contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of the order dated 21.12.2024 passed by this court in W.P.No.33274 of 2012.

2. When this matter earlier came up for consideration, this court issued statutory notice on 25.10.2025, and accordingly, the respondents appeared in person before this court on 21.11.2025 without complying with the orders passed by this court. Hence, the respondents were afforded a final opportunity for explaining their conduct as to why they should not be punished, and they were required to file an affidavit in that regard. However, when the matter was again taken up for consideration on 09.01.2026, it was reported that the respondents have complied with the orders passed by this court and the amounts that are payable to the petitioner were already paid. Under those circumstances, the respondents are directed to furnish break-up particulars of the amounts that were paid to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the same was furnished to the petitioner. When the matter again came up for consideration on 06.02.2026, the learned counsel for the respondents produced a copy of the break-up particulars of the amounts that were paid to the petitioner, and the learned counsel for the petitioner sought time to verify the same.

3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, there is no representation for the petitioner. Under these circumstances, this court is convinced that the respondents have complied with the orders passed by this court, and accordingly, the contempt petition is closed. In case, if the petitioner has got any grievance with regard to the amounts that were paid to the petitioner, he is at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. Consequently, the connected applications, if any, shall stand closed.

20.02.2026 skr Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.

skr 20.02.2026