G.Thangeswari v. Tmt.D.Uma

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.06.2024 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

1. G.Thangeswari ... Petitioner in Cont.P.No.29/24

2. S.Parimala ... Petitioner in Cont.P.No.33/24

3. R.Rasia ... Petitioner in Cont.P.No.39/24 Vs Tmt.D.Uma, Member TET, Teachers Recruitment Board, 4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maligai, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai - 600 006 ... Respondent in all cases PRAYER in Cont.P.No.29 of 2024 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the Respondent for the willful disobedience of the Order of this Court passed in W.P.No.30749 of 2022 dated 20.06.2023 under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act.

PRAYER in Cont.P.No.33 of 2024 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the 1/4

Respondent for the willful disobedience of the Order of this Court passed in W.P.No.30953 of 2022 dated 20.06.2023 under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act.

PRAYER in Cont.P.No.39 of 2024 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the Respondent for the willful disobedience of the Order of this Court passed in W.P.No.30941 of 2022 dated 20.06.2023 under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Murugesan in all cases For Respondent : Mr.R.Neelakandan in all cases Additional Advocate General - VIII assisted by Mr.C.Kathiravan Special Government Pleader C O M M O N O R D E R Pursuant to the orders passed in the writ petitions, the objection which the petitioners have raised to Question Nos.12, 39, 62, 69, 100, 102 and 108 have been scrutinised by the experts and they have rejected the same. The fact that all the objections have been rejected have been furnished to the petitioners by way of a tabular statement. The only objection which the petitioners now raise is that the report was not furnished and that there was 2/4

no signature in the tabular statement given.

2. The learned Additional Advocate General, however would submit that what was submitted to the petitioners was a true extract of the Expert Committee's opinion. His statement is hereby recorded.

3. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the expert's views on the objections raised by the petitioners have been supplied to the writ petitioners and as such, the disobedience alleged cannot be termed to be wilful in nature. Accordingly, the contempt petitions are closed. No Costs. 14.06.2024 ars Index: Yes/No To The Member TET, Teachers Recruitment Board, 4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maligai, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai - 600 006 3/4

M.S.RAMESH, J.

ars 14.06.2024 4/4