Nlc Jeeva Oppantha Thozhilalar Sangam, v. Mr. Thirukumaran,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.12.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY NLC Jeeva Oppantha Thozhilalar Sangam, Represented by its General Secretary, Door No. 01, Panruti Main Road, Krishna Maravadi (Near), Abathanapuram, Vadalur, Kurinchipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District.
... Petitioner Vs Mr.Thirukumaran, M/s. NLC India Limited, Represented by its Deputy General Manager (HR)/IR Neyveli 607 801.
... Respondent Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the respondents for willfully disobeying the orders passed in the writ petition in W.M.P.No. 26151 of 2024 in W.P.No. 23894 of 2024 dated 16.08.2024.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Nedunchezhiyan For Respondent : Mr.N.Nithianandam 1/4
ORDER
The contempt petition has been filed complaining of the willful disobedience of the interim order passed in W.M.P.No 26151 of 2024, etc., in W.P.No.23894 of 2024.
2. The interim order passed by this Court is extracted hereunder: "This Hon'ble Court has passed an order on 14.08.2024 that the 5th respondent is injuncted from going on strike.
2. The 7th Respondent is directed to provide adequate police protection within the premises and more specifically in the ingress and egress of the entries of the writ petitioner company. This order shall remain in force till the final order is passed in this case.
3. The Superintendent of Police is directed to ensure absolute police protection in and around the petitioner's company. The petitioner as well as the other respondents are directed to maintain status quo in their respective limits."
3. The violation which is now complained by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that they have terminated the services of some of the employees and are also proceeding against many of the employees with reference to strike. Firstly, it can be seen that the main writ petition itself was disposed of on 04.10.2024 and therefore, entertaining of the contempt petition 2/4
as against the interim order at this stage does not arise.
4. Secondly, the interim order in paragraph No. 2, directs the police to grant police protection. It specifically states that the order will remain in force until the final order passed in the case. In paragraph No.3, the Superintendent of Police is directed to ensure absolute police protection in and around the petitioner's company. In that context, it is also stated that the petitioner as well as the respondents are directed to maintain the status quo in their respective limits. That cannot be read to be meant about the service conditions or disciplinary action which is supposed to be taken by the management.
5. In any event, the final orders were passed on 04.10.2024 and therefore, at this stage, the contempt petition cannot be entertained. All the grounds raised in the contempt petition are kept open for the petitioner to raise in appropriate proceedings challenging their disciplinary enquiry or termination order in the manner known to law.
6. In view thereof, the contempt petition stands dismissed. No costs. 11.12.2024 3/4
nsl D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
nsl 11.12.2024 4/4