U.Vigneshwaran v. M.Pradeepukumar

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.11.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN in W.P(MD)No.11585 of 2022 U.Vigneshwaran ... Petitioner / Petitioner Vs.

M.Pradeepkumar, I.A.S., District Collector, Collectorate, Trichy District.

Trichy.

... Contemnor/ 1st Respondent PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the contemnor / first respondent for his deliberate and willful disobedience of order passed by this Court in 08.07.2022 in W.P(MD)No.11585 of 2022.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.R.Murugesan 1/5

For Respondent : Mr.R.Baskaran Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.J.K.Jayaseelan Government Advocate

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate General assisted by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.

2. The petitioner is an elected president of Village Panchayat. Vide order dated 17.02.2022, he was deprived of his cheque signing power. Questioning the same, he filed W.P(MD)No.11585 of 2022. Since the principles of natural justice were not complied with, the order passed by the District Collector was set aside and the writ petition was allowed. Liberty was given to the authority to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though the writ petition had been allowed, his cheque signing power has not been restored. That led to filing of this contempt petition. 2/5

4. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Advocate General produced copy of the proceedings dated 27.10.2022 whereby the petitioner's cheque signing power has been restored.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner complains that this order was served only yesterday (10.11.2022) at 01.00 p.m. I do not want to go into the controversy. However, I want to make it clear that when this Court had allowed the writ petition on 08.07.2022 only two courses of the action were open to the respondent. He could have filed writ appeal challenging this Court's order. In the alternative he ought to have complied with the order immediately. The delay in complying with the order cannot be appreciated. There is delay of almost three months. Merely because proceedings for removing the petitioner were pending, that cannot be a ground for not complying with the order of this Court. I expect the authorities to show alacrity in complying with the Court's order when there is no proposal to question the same before the Hon'ble Division Bench.

3/5

6. Now that the order of this Court has been complied with, no purpose will be served in proceeding with the contempt petition. Accepting the stand of the learned Additional Advocate General, this contempt petition is closed.

11.11.2022 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No mga To The District Collector, Collectorate, Trichy District.

Trichy.

4/5

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

mga in W.P(MD)No.11585 of 2022 11.11.2022 5/5