The Managing Director v. Muthupandeeswari

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.04.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Rev.Aplc(MD)No.250 of 2025, Cont.P.(MD)No.1493 of 2025, W.P.(MD)No.26276 of 2025 & C.M.P.(MD) No.19041 of 2025 & W.M.P.(MD)No.20441 of 2025 Rev.Aplc(MD)No.250 of 2025 1.The Managing Director, No.12, Thambusamy Street, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010.

2.The Sub Collector / Regional Manager,

...Petitioners

Vs Muthupandeeswari Proprietor, M/s.Muthupandeeswari Modern Rice Mill, No.43/5 Karisallkulam Road, Samanatham, Madurai District.

... Respondent 1/8

Prayer: Review Application filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 r/w Section 114 of CPC to review the order dated 29.04.2025 in W.A.(MD)No.665 of 2025, on the file of this Court and allow this Review Application. For Petitioners :

Mr.M.Ajmal khan, senior counsel Assisted by Mr.G.Mohankumar For Respondent :

Mr.Sarath Chander for Mr.R.Suriyanarayanan Cont.P.(MD)No.1493 of 2025 Muthupandeeswari Proprietor, M/s.Muthupandeeswari Modern Rice Mill, Door No.43/5 Karisallkulam Road, Samanatham, Madurai District.

...Petitioner

vs.

1.A.Shanmuga Sundaram, I.A.S., The Managing Director, No.12, Thambusamy Street, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010.

2.Mr.K.Gunashekar, The Sub Collector / Regional Manager, ...Contemnor / respondents 2/8

Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act praying to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents, for their wilful disobedience and non-compliance of the order of this Court dated 29.04.2025 in W.A.(MD)No.665 of 2025. For Petitioner : Mr.Sarath Chander for Mr.R.Suriyanarayanan For Respondents : Mr.M.Ajmal khan, senior counsel Assisted by Mr.G.Mohankumar Muthupandeeswari Proprietor, M/s.Muthupandeeswari Modern Rice Mill, Door No.43/5 Karisallkulam Road, Samanatham, Madurai District.

...Petitioner

vs.

s 1.The Managing Director, Head Office, Chennai Metro Rail Office Complex, Poonthamalee Highway, Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107.

2.The Sub Collector / Regional Manager,

...Respondents

3/8

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the order passed by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.MH4/055127/2025, dated 09.09.2025 and quash the same, as it is arbitrary and illegal and in consequence to direct the first respondent to reinstate the petitioner as hulling agent and allot monthly paddy as per contract dated 26.07.2023 to the petitioner's rice mill. For Petitioner : Mr.Sarath Chander for Mr.R.Suriyanarayanan For Respondents : Mr.M.Ajmal khan, senior counsel Assisted by Mr.G.Mohankumar C O M M O N O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.) The Review Application is mainly filed on the ground that, in the Writ Appeal in W.A.(MD)No.665 of 2025, this Court quashed a portion of the order passed by the second petitioner herein, and after pronouncement of orders, this Court has permitted the appellant therein to open the Mill and to supply paddy.

4/8

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranks in the Review Application.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that though the Division Bench has concluded that there was violation of principles of natural justice, the Writ Appeal was allowed only in respect of blacklisting of the respondent, whereas, the order of the second petitioner is a composite order, not only related to blacklisting, but also termination of contract and forfeiture. Therefore, according to him, the Appellate Court has quashed one portion of the second petitioner's order i.e., blacklisting of the respondent and has approved other two portions of the order i.e., termination of contract and forfeiture, which is against the very fundamentals. Hence, he prayed that the entire order of the Appellate Court has to be reviewed.

4. Heard both sides and perused the records.

5/8

5. Challenge has been made to the Writ Court against the order of the second petitioner herein, on the grounds of blacklist, termination of contract and forfeiture of licence. The Writ Court, dismissed the Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.3829 of 2025, vide order dated 17.02.2025, relegating the parties to go to Arbitration. The said order has been challenged by way of the above said Writ Appeal, stating that there is violation of principles of natural justice. The Appellate Court, after pronouncement of orders has directed the respondent to open the mill and supply paddy, facilitating the respondent to function the mill.

However, we are of the view that once the Appellate Court has come to a conclusion that there is violation of principles of natural justice, any consequence resulted from such violation has to go and there cannot be any segregation with regard to a portion of the order alone. Hence, we are of the view that the Writ Appeal in W.A.(MD)No.665 of 2025 has to be heard in entirety on merits. Hence, instead of reviewing the order of this Court dated 29.04.2025 in W.A.(MD)No.665 of 2025, this Court is inclined to re-call that order.

6/8

6. Accordingly, the Review Application is allowed and the order of this Court dated 29.04.2025 in W.A.(MD)No.665 of 2025 is re-called. Post the appeal in W.A.(MD)No.665 of 2025 before the regular bench, under the caption 'for arguments', along with W.P.(MD)No.26276 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)No.20441 of 2025. In view of the above order allowing the Review Application, the Contempt Petition is closed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition in C.M.P.(MD)No. 19041 of 2025 is closed.

[N.S.K., J.] [S.S.Y., J.] 09.04.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non-speaking order mbi To 1.The Managing Director, No.12, Thambusamy Street, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010.

2.The Sub Collector / Regional Manager, 7/8

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

AND S.SRIMATHY, J.

mbi 09.04.2026 8/8