A.Shanmugam v. Thirumathi. Santha

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.09.2024 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and W.P.(MD)No.23062 of 2023 A.Shanmugam ... Petitioner Vs Mrs.Santha, Tahsildar, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

... Respondent PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the contemnor for his willful disobedience in not complying the order dated 21-09-2023 passed by this Hon'ble court in W.P.(MD).No.23062 of 2023.

For Petitioner : Mr. J.Anandkumar For Respondent : Mr.A.Baskaran Additional Government Pleader 1/4

O R D E R

Alleging wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.23062 of 2023, this Contempt Petition has been filed. 2.The petitioner has filed the above writ petition in W.P.(MD)No. 23062 of 2023, seeking a direction to the respondent to delete deceased Manickam name from Patta No.1408 in S.No.384/3 situated at Sempoothi Village, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Pudukottai District. When the writ petition was taken up for hearing, a representation was made by the learned Government Advocate that an enquiry is being conducted by the revenue officials and the same would be concluded within a period of eight weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. Recording the same, the said petition was closed.

3.The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent has concluded the enquiry within the said period, however, she has not complied with the orders.

4.When this contempt petition is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Government Pleader has produced the proceedings of the 2/4

Tahsildar, Ponnamaravathi in ep/K/6942/2023/m1, dated 21.08.2024 and submitted that a final decision has been taken on the petitioner's representation and a copy of the same was also served to the petitioner. 5.In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain this petition and therefore, this contempt petition stands closed. 6.The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner has obtained an order from the competent civil Court, the Tahsildar, Ponnamaravathi, without considering the same, has erroneously passed an order that the petitioner has not availed the benefit in the EP proceedings.

7.If the order, dated 21.08.2024 has been passed in an erroneous manner, the petitioner has to workout his remedy only by challenging the order, dated 21.08.2024, in the manner known to law. Therefore, this contempt petition is closed.

12.09.2024 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No 3/4

NCC :Yes/No LR B.PUGALENDHI , J.

LR 12.09.2024 4/4