G. Vellaichamy v. T. Veerapandian

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.06.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR CONT. P(MD)No.12 of 2016 in W.P.(MD)No.8030 of 2013 G.Vellaichamy : Petitioner /Petitioner Vs.

1.Mr.T.Veerapandian, The Managing Director, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Madurai Ltd., Madurai.

2.Mr.G.Udayakumar, The General Manager, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Madurai Ltd., Madurai.

: Respondents/Respondents PRAYER: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, praying to punish the respondents herein for willfully and deliberately committing contempt of Court by willfully disobeying the order of this Hon'ble Court passed in W.P.(MD)No.8030 of 2013 dated 09.01.2014.

Prayer in WP(MD). 8030/ 2013 :

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service with backwages and all other attendant and monetary an dother service benefits in the light of the order passed by the Authority under Section 33(2) (b) of Industrial Disputes Act in A.P. No.211/2010 dated 26.12.2012, rejecting the Approved Petition filed by the Respondents/Management. For Petitioner : Mr.T.A.Ebenezer For Respondent : Mr.A.Jeyaraman Standing Counsel for TNSTC

ORDER

********* This Contempt Petition has been filed for the alleged disobedience on the part of the respondent of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.8030 of 2013 dated 09.01.2014. 2.This Court during the last hearing, ie., on 24.04.2018, directed the respondents to comply with the order and file a report to that effect before this Court, today. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.Today, when the case came up for hearing, Mr.A.Jeyaraman, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation would submit that a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- [Rupees Four Lakhs only] by way of cheque has been given to the petitioner and he has also received the same. With regard to the remaining amount, after ascertaining as to whether anything to be recovered from the petitioner, the same shall also be disbursed within a period of two months as the said exercise will take some time for which notice has already been issued to the petitioner. 4.The said submission of the learned Counsel for the respondent is not disputed by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, who would submit that, the receipt of the cheque subject to realisation is a part payment and certainly, still more amount should come from the respondent Corporation and if within two months, the same is not disbursed, the petitioner may be given liberty to revive this contempt petition.

5.Considering the said submissions made by both sides, in view of the major compliance by issuance of a cheque for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- [Rupees Four Lakhs only], receipt of which is acknowledged by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, this Contempt Petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to revive this Contempt Petition, if the remaining amount is not disbursed within two months, as undertaken by the respondent. Sd/ Assistant Registrar(CS-II) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar CONT. P(MD)No.12 of 2016 11.06.2018 MR KK/SV MMS/SAR-1/28.06.2018/2P-1C/ https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/