Mrs. Parameswari v. Shri. Ashish Madhaorao More, I.A.S.,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.04.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA Mrs.Parameswari ... Petitioner Vs.
Shri Ashish Madhaorao More, IAS., Secretary to Government, Department of Revenue, Government of Pondicherry, Pondicherry.
... Respondent Prayer: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondent for willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.6955 of 2020 dated 16.02.2024. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesulu For Respondent : Mr.Ramasamy Meyyappan, GA for Pondy led by S.Ravikumar, GP (Govt. of Pondy) Page No.1 of 6
ORDER
This Contempt Petition has been filed to punish the respondent for willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.6955 of 2020 dated 16.02.2024.
2. The allegation of the petitioner is that the job has been provided not to the member of the petitioner's family but to someone else who is not connected to the petitioner's family and he belongs to the different community.
3. The status report of the respondent does not state anything specific as to the allegations made by the petitioner. So it is for the petitioner to initiate action for seeking compensation. It is for the respondent to give a specific answer as to the allegation made by the petitioner stating that the job has been given to a person belonging to some other community.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Pondy) for the respondent submitted that two different people from two different community claimed title over the property. Hence, the petitioner has to prove the Page No.2 of 6
title.
5. In such case, it is difficult to understand how the respondent came to accept one community person is the owner of the land and granted job assistance. Even these details now submitted by the learned Government Advocate for the respondent did not form part of the record i.e., a status report has not been filed in this regard. The respondent did not record these reasons and passed any order. Had there been an order of that nature, it would have been possible for the petitioner to challenge the same by seeking appropriate relief before the appropriate forum.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court to appreciate the bunch of documents in which it is alleged that the respondent himself has acknowledged the application filed by the petitioner on the understanding that she is the relative of the land owner whose land has been acquired by the Government for the purpose of University. Even all these submissions now made by the learned counsel for the petitioner can be kept open and be available to her in any other Page No.3 of 6
proceedings that might be taken to challenge the individual order that needs to be passed by the respondent on the pending application of the petitioner.
7. By recording the same, this Contempt Petition is closed for the present. The respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on the application filed by the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Index : Yes /No 28.04.2025 Internet : Yes/No Speaking / Non-speaking gsk Page No.4 of 6
To Shri Ashish Madhaorao More, IAS., Secretary to Government, Department of Revenue, Government of Pondicherry, Pondicherry.
Page No.5 of 6
R.N.MANJULA , J.
gsk 28.04.2025 Page No.6 of 6