Madras High CourtCONT P(MD)/874/2026closed

Subhiksha v. Mr.Gagandeep Singh Bedi, I.A.S.,

2026-03-25Honourable Mr Justice B.Pugalendhi6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 25.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI CONT P(MD)No.874 of 2026 Subhiksha ... Petitioner Vs.

1. Mr.Gagandeep Singh Bedi, I.A.S.

The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 9.

2. Mr.P.Ponniah, I.A.S.

The Commissioner, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 015.

3. Dr.P.Senthil Kumar, I.A.S.

Principal Secretary/Director General, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 015.

4. Mr.Ranjeet Singh, I.A.S.

The District Collector, Theni District, Theni.

... Respondents 1/6

Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the Contemnor/Respondents for willfully disobeying the order of this Court dated 27.01.2026 passed in W.P.(MD)No.36746 of 2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Pitchai Muthu For Respondents : Mr.Ajmalkhan, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh, Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

This Contempt Petition has been filed complaining that the order of this Court dated 27.01.2026 passed in W.P.(MD)No.36746 of 2025 has not been complied with.

2. Today, when this contempt petition is taken up for consideration, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents submits that a Division Bench of this Court has seized off this issue in W.P.(MD)No.35806 of 2025 on 04.03.2026 and passed an 2/6

order as under:

"This writ petition has been filed challenging Rule 3 of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat Secretaries (Condition of Service) Rules, 2023 with regard to the appointment to the post of Panchayat Secretary. 2.According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the very Rule framed by the Government violates Article 243 of the Constitution of India. Under Article 243 of the Constitution, reservation shall be made and in view of subject Rule, the entire District Panchayats has been made as one unit and hence, it will go against the very constitution.

3.The learned Additional Government Pleader submits that there is a direction by the learned Single Judge to complete the recruitment process within the time limit and seeks time to file counter.

4. On perusal of the Rule in question, we find that though the Rule for appointment has been framed for direct recruitments, there is no procedure whatsoever set out as to the manner in which the direct recruitment should be appointed under the said provisions.

5. Considering the fact that the challenge has been made to the Rule position and also considering the fact that there is no specific procedure set out in the Rules with regard to the recruitment process, we are of the view 3/6

that the matter requires detailed analysis.

6. Since the very Rule, under which the recruitment process was undertaken is under challenge, we hold that pursuant to the said Rule there shall not be any appointment at present."

3. For the first time, this Court found that the selection process has been conducted by the Government agency in a fair and proper manner. This Court has issued a direction in the earlier round of litigation to ensure that the method of recruitment should not be affected.

4. Since the Division Bench has seized off the matter and passed an order that there shall not be any appointment at present, this Contempt Petition is closed.

25.03.2026 ogy 4/6