R. Subbulakshmi v. P.Saravanan

Cont.P.(MD).No.1856 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.01.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN Cont.P.(MD).No.1856 of 2021 in W.P.(MD).No.16038 of 2021 R.Subbulakshmi ... Petitioner / Writ Petitioner Vs.

P.Saravanan, The Tahsildar, Thiruparankundram Taluk, Maduarai District.

...Contempnor/2nd Respondent PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act to initiate contempt proceedings against the contemnors/respondents and punish him for the willful disobedience of the order of this Court in W.P(MD).No.16038 of 2021, dated 08.09.2021.

Prayer in WP(MD). 16038/ 2021 :

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ or Order or Direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd Respondent to issue patta in the names of the petitioner and her two children, son and daughter by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 26.07.2021 and granting such other further reliefs as this Honourable court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and thus render justice. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Paranthaman For Respondent : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

This Contempt Petition has been filed complaining non compliance of the order dated 08.09.2021 in W.P.(MD).No.16038 of 2021, Subbulakshmi Vs the District Collector and another.

2. It is an admitted fact that an order had been passed pursuant to the direction in the Writ Petition. However, the grievance of Mr.Paranthaman, learned counsel for the contempt petitioner is that though the order has been passed, a https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Cont.P.(MD).No.1856 of 2021 representation given by the petitioner which had been directed to be considered had not been considered in its true letter and spirit. The nature of the order will only depend upon the facts that are available before the respondent. If further facts are to be considered or have not been considered, then the order passed will have to be taken up further in manner known to law.

3. I would give that particular liberty to the petitioner herein. But, the scope of the Contempt Petition is quite narrow. It only examines whether there is a compliance of the direction in the Writ Petition. Nature of compliance can never be re-examined in the Contempt Petition and the arguments advanced in the Writ Petition can also not be advanced in the Contempt Petition.

4. I will therefore give necessary liberty to the petitioner to take up the issue further if the order passed by the respondent is not to the satisfaction of the petitioner herein.

5. Giving that particular liberty, the Contempt Petition stands closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS III) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) Nsr NOTE:

In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To The Tahsildar, Thiruparankundram Taluk, Maduarai District.

+1 CC to M/s.P.PARANTHAMAN, Advocate ( SR-548[F] dated 06/01/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-354[F] dated 05/01/2022 ) Cont.P.(MD).No.1856 of 2021 in W.P.(MD).No.16038 of 2021 04.01.2022 MGJ(12.01.2022) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2