Muhammad Mujeebur Rahman v. Radhakrishnan Ias And 3 Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 09.02.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR Muhammed Mujeebur Rahman Secretary, Nawab Faeelathunnisa Begum Saheba Mosque & Endowment [Wakf], 796, Old No.419, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai - 35.

... Petitioner Vs

1. Dr.Radhakrishanan, I.A.S., Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai.

2. Mr.Saravana Moorthy, The Zonal Officer, Greater Chennai Corporation, 118, Dr.Muthulakshmi Salai, Adyar, Chennai - 20.

3. Mr.Anshul Mishra, The Member Secreary, Chennai MetropolitanDevelopment Authority, No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai.

1/5

4. Mr.Suresh, Assisant Executive Officer, Corporation of Chennai, Adyar Zone XIII, L.B. Road, Adyar, Chennai - 20.

... Respondents Prayer:- Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act to punish the respondent for willful disobedience of the Order of this Court dated 20.02.2023 in W.P.No.33830 of 2022. For Petitioner : Mr.N.A.Nassir For Respondents : Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu, Standing Counsel for Chennai Corporation - R1, 2 & 4 Ms.P.Veena Suresh Standing Counsel for CMDA - R3

ORDER

This Contempt Petition has been filed to punish the respondent for willful disobedience of the Order of this Court dated 20.02.2023 in W.P.No.33830 of 2022.

2. Heard Mr.N.A.Nassir, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu, learned Standing Counsel for the 2/5

respondents R1, R2 and R4 and Ms.P.Veena Suresh, learned Standing Counsel for third respondent.

3. While disposing the Writ Petition in W.P.No.33830 of 2022 filed by the contempt petitioner, this Court directed the respondents 1 to 4 to inspect the building in question within a period of two weeks and if any unauthorized construction is put up without any approved plan or deviation of the approved plan, take action in accordance with law. This Contempt Petition has been filed stating that the official respondents in the writ petition have not complied the direction of this Court.

4. The fact that the respondents have initiated proceedings for lock and seal and demolition of the premises is not disputed. This Court has entertained the writ petition filed by the respondent in W.P.No.2638 of 2024 challenging the Order which was passed as against the private respondents and this Court has also granted interim Order in the writ petition.

5. In said circumstances, the contempt petition can be closed recording compliance. However, the closure of this Contempt Petition 3/5

will not prejudice the right of any one. It is open to the petitioner to get himself impleaded as party in W.P.No.2638 of 2024 for disposal of the same early or to take steps to vacate interim Order.

6. Accordingly, this Contempt Petition is closed. [SSSRJ] [NSJ] 09.02.2024 vrc 4/5

S.S.SUNDAR, J.

AND N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

vrc 09.02.2024 5/5