S.Anish Aseer vs Rt.Rev. Argst.Barnabas
2024 Latest Caselaw 7595 Mad

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 7595 Mad
Judgement Date : 10 April, 2024

Madras High Court

S.Anish Aseer vs Rt.Rev. Argst.Barnabas on 10 April, 2024

Author: G.R.Swaminathan

Bench: G.R.Swaminathan

                                                                                 CONT P(MD)No.512 of 2024


                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                   DATED : 10.04.2024

                                                        CORAM

                                  THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

                                             CONT P(MD)No.512 of 2024

                S.Anish Aseer                                                        ... Petitioner

                                                          Vs.

                Rt.Rev. ARGST.Barnabas
                Bishop / The President,
                Executive Committee of Diocesan
                      Council,
                CSI Tirunelveli Diocese, Tirunelveli – 627 002.                ... Contemnor /
                                                                                5th respondent /
                                                                                5th respondent

                Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts
                Act to punish the contemnor/first respondent for the willful disobedience of
                the order of this Court in WMP(MD)No.10294/2023 in WP(MD)No.11868 of
                2023 dated 12.05.2023.

                                  For Petitioner     : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai

                                  For Respondent     : Mr.H.Arumugam




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                1/8
                                                                                 CONT P(MD)No.512 of 2024




                                                        ORDER

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

2.The petitioner is a member of the Executive Committee of CSI

Tirunelveli Diocese. The petitioner's term would expire on 12.04.2024. The

petitioner filed WP(MD)No.11868 of 2023 challenging the election notification

issued by the Rt.Rev.Bishop on the ground that it would entail cutting short

his tenure. Finding merit in the said contention, I granted an interim order on

12.05.2023. Contending that the said order has been breached,

Cont P(MD)No.512 of 2024 was filed.

3.Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel

for the petitioner submitted that the respondent proposed to convene a

meeting on 11.04.2024. One of the items in the agenda is to take decision

with regard to the administration of the diocese with effect from 13.04.2024.

The counsel for the petitioner drew my attention to Rule 3 Chapter IV of CSI

Constitution which provides that all existing membership shall terminate when

a new diocesan council is elected or at the end of completion of 90 days from

the expiry term of the old council and that the Bishop of the Diocese is

empowered to make temporary arrangements for the proper administration of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

the diocese. The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that as on

date, new council is yet to be elected. The petitioner's counsel would further

contend that by showing the door to the petitioner, the aforesaid Rule is

breached. I can entertain the contempt petition only if the court's order is

breached and not when the Rule set out in the CSI constitution is breached.

That may furnish an independent and separate cause of action for the

petitioner.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner thereupon lamented that

whenever writ petitions are filed pertaining to the affairs of the Tirunelveli

Diocese, they are are not listed before the Hon'ble Judge holding the roster.

Instead, they are transferred to the principal seat. On 25.03.2024, I passed

the following order :

“I am reminded of an anecdote narrated by the legendry lawyer Shri Nani Palkhivala in one of his iconic budget speeches. A Russian emperor took fancy for a particular rose plant in his garden. Security arrangements were duly made for that plant. Years rolled by; the plant withered away; the emperor died; but the security arrangements remained.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2.When the Tirunelveli Diocese was brought under the administration of two Hon'ble retired Judges, a number of writ petitions were filed challenging their decisions. In order to ensure that there is uniformity, the Hon'ble Division Bench vide order dated 25.02.2020 in WA(MD)No.878 of 2019 directed that all the matters impugning the decision of the administrators will be placed before Hon'ble Mr.Justice R.Mahadevan. The administrators are no longer in charge.

They had discharged their roles. A new body had been elected. But all the writ petitions pertaining to Tirunelveli Diocese that are filed in the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court are transmitted to the Principal Seat. I am told sixty such writ petitions have so far been transferred. When Cont P(MD)No.512 of 2024 was listed today morning, I passed the following order :

“2.When the matter was taken up for hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel on either side that WP(MD)No.6660 of 2024 filed by one Manohar Thangaraj seeking appointment of administrator for conducting the election for CSI, Tirunelveli Diocese filed before Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has been transferred to the Principal Seat. It appears that the transfer was done based on the order dated 25.02.2020 made in WA(MD)No.878 of 2019 etc batch. Paragraph 33 of the said order reads as follows:

“33.In view of the above discussions, we are not inclined to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge. The Administrators are requested to https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

continue with their services as directed in paragraph 114 of the judgment of the learned Single Judge. We make it clear that the decisions taken by the Administrators cannot be made as a subject matter of challenge before any other Court or Authorities. The learned Single Judge has come out with a mechanism whereby, the writ petition is kept alive as a continuing mandamus that will be issued by this Court while monitoring the functioning of the Administrators and scrutinizing their reports. Therefore, any person aggrieved by the decision taken by the Administrator can always agitate the same before the learned Single Judge as and when the case is posted for scrutinizing the report of the Administrator. We also make it clear that no individual writ petitions will be entertained against the decisions of the Administrators. As already held by this Court, this arrangement is only going to last for a few more months. If any interim orders are in operation which directly or indirectly touches upon the functioning of the Administrators, the same is hereby vacated. Consequently, all the Writ Petitions that have been filed challenging the decisions taken by the Administrators is also closed.”

From a reading of the said order, I conclude that only writ petitions challenging the decisions of the administrators alone have to be transferred to the Principal Seat and placed before the Hon'ble Mr.Justice R.Mahadevan. It is submitted by the learned counsel on

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

either side that the administrators have already been discharged.

3.The Registrar Judicial, Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, Madurai shall clarify by 02.15 p.m today if there is any other order of the Hon'ble Chief Justice mandating such transfers to the Principal Seat.”

3.The Registrar (Judicial) has clarified that apart from the order dated 25.02.2020 made in WA(MD)No.878 of 2019 etc batch, there is no other order. I am more than satisfied that matters relating to Tirunelveli Diocese that are filed in the Madurai Bench should be heard by the Judge who is holding the roster at the Madurai Bench. Since a number of writ petitions had already been transferred to the Principal Seat, Registry is directed to place the papers before the Hon'ble Administrative Judge so as to obtain orders from My Lord The Hon'ble Chief Justice to consider re-transferring the bundles back to this Bench.

4.Call this case along with WP(MD)Nos.11868 & 11869 of 2023.”

5.Paragraph 3 of the aforesaid order categorically states that matters

relating to Tirunelveli Diocese should be heard by the Judge who is holding

the roster at the Madurai Bench. Let me remind the Registry that this is a

judicial order and non-compliance of the same will constitute contempt of

court. If the petitioner or any other member files any writ petition pertaining

to the affairs of CSI Tirunelveli Diocese before the Madurai Bench and the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

same is not listed before the Judge who is holding the roster in the Madurai

Bench, it will be viewed very seriously and proceedings will be initiated for

contempt of court.