Ramarasu v. Kavitha Ramu Ias
Cont.P(MD)No.334 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.04.2022 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI Contempt Petition(MD)No.334 of 2022 Ramarasu ... Petitioner/Petitioner vs.
Tmt.Kavitha Ramu, I.A.S., District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.
... Respondent/1st Respondent Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondent herein for her willful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court passed in W.P(MD)No.7010 of 2021 dated 29.03.2021.
Prayer in WP(MD). 7010/ 2021 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or order of direction particularly in the nature of Writ, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to take action on the petitioners representation, dated 02.03.2021 and to restore the Government land situated in S.No.621 of Aathanakkottai village, pudukkottai and brought the same for public use and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Saravanan For Respondent : Mr.Veera Kathiravan Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.A.Baskaran, Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
AND S.ANANTHI, J.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the order of the Division Bench made in W.P(MD)No.7010 of 2021, dated 29.03.2021 has not been complied with.
2.
The order of the Division Bench reads as follows:- ''The petitioner made a complaint to the respondent No.1, inter alia, alleging that the relatives of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Page 1/2
Cont.P(MD)No.334 of 2022 respondent No.5, who have also been arrayed as respondents 6 and 7, have been given patta by the respondent No.3 for extraneous consideration.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the aforesaid factum, while the learned counsel for the private respondents denied it.
3.Considering the above, we direct the respondent No.1 to look into the aforesaid representation made on 02.03.2021 and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
4. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs.''
3.
After receipt of notice in the contempt petition and after the District Collector was directed to appear before us by our order dated 25.03.2022, wisdom has dawned upon the district administration and the District Revenue Officer cum District Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Officer, Pudukkottai, has issued orders on 26.03.2022 disposing of the representation of the petitioner. 4.
The grievance of the petitioner has been partly redressed inasmuch as pattas granted to two individuals have been cancelled on the ground that they were not qualified.
5.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the others whose pattas have been confirmed, are also not qualified. We do not think we can go into that question in the contempt proceedings. We see substantial compliance of the orders of this Court.
6.
Hence, the Contempt Petition is closed leaving it open to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 26.03.2022 in a manner known to law.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Writs) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) bala To Tmt.Kavitha Ramu, I.A.S., District Collector, Pudukkottai District,Pudukkottai.
+1 CC to M/s.M.SARAVANAN, Advocate ( SR-20841[F] dated 25/04/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP. ( SR-21489[F] dated 26/04/2022 ) Cont.P(MD)No.334 of 2022 DATED : 22.04.2022 MGJ(10.05.2022) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Page 2/2