Madras High Court
The Correspondent vs A.Pugazhendhi on 8 July, 2025
CONT.P(MD)No.854 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 08.07.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED
CONT.P(MD) No.854 of 2023
in
W.P.(MD) No.18867 of 2019
The Correspondent,
St.John Vianney's Girls,
Higher Secondary School,
Palliyadi 629 169,
Kanyakumari District. ... Petitioner
vs.
1.A.Pugazhendhi,
The Chief Educational Officer,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
2.S.K.Ravichandran,
The District Educational Officer,
Marthandam, Kanyakumari District
Previously
The District Educational Officer,
Kuzhithurai,
Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court
to punish the contemnors/respondents herein for his deliberate and wilful
disobedience of the order of this Court, dated 02.09.2022 in W.P.(MD) No.
18867 of 2019 under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section
11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/07/2025 02:09:09 pm )
CONT.P(MD)No.854 of 2023
For Petitioner :Mr.K.Ragatheesh Kumar for
M/S.Isaac Chambers
For Respondents :Mr.D.Sadiq Raja
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
This Contempt Petition has been filed with the prayer that the
respondents/contemnors have not complied with the judgment and order
passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.18867 of 2019, dated 02.09.2022.
2.Heard Mr.K.Ragatheesh Kumar for M/S.Isaac Chambers appearing
for the petitioner and Mr.D.Sadiq Raja, learned Additional Government
Pleader, for the Respondents.
3.The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions, in
which, the main writ petition number is W.P.(MD) No.6340 of 2018, vide
judgment and order dated 02.09.2022, had passed the following order in W.P.
(MD) No.18867 of 2019:-
“Accordingly, the impugned order dated 15.10.2018, on the file
of the third respondent is quashed. Consequently, there shall be a
direction to the concerned Educational Authorities to forthwith pass
orders, approving the appointment of M.Jancy Rani, to the post of
B.T.Assistant (Science), in the petitioner school with effect from
07.10.2014, together with all service and monetary benefits, within a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/07/2025 02:09:09 pm )
period of four (4) weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.”
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the
judgment and order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.18867 of 2019,
dated 02.09.2022, the respondents have not complied with the directions of
this Court. Thus, being no other alternative, the present Contempt Petition
has been filed with the prayer that the respondents/contemnors have wilfully
and deliberately flouted the order passed by this Court and are in contempt of
the judgment and order of this Court dated 02.09.2022. Thus, they should be
summoned and punished by exercising the powers under Sections 11 and 12
of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
5.Today, when the matter is taken up, Mr.D.Sadiq Raja, learned
Additional Government Pleader for the respondents submits that challenging
the judgment and order, dated 02.09.2022, the respondents have preferred
an appeal in W.A.(MD) No.2097 of 2023, before this Court, which was
allowed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, vide judgment and order,
dated 11.12.2023 with the following terms:-
“39.Regarding the powers of Administrator, the State has no
dispute as the Administrator appointed by the Court is empowered
to appoint the Teachers by following the procedures as
contemplated. Therefore, the District Educational Officers
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/07/2025 02:09:09 pm )
concerned cannot reject the approval on the ground that the first
respondent/Teacher was appointed/promoted by the Administrator.
However, the authorities competent are empowered to look into
other criteria including the educational qualifications, validity of
such educational qualifications and sanctioned strength including
surplus Teachers on the date of appointment and other mandatory
conditions fixed by the Education Department for the purpose of
grant of promotion with reference to the Act and Rules in force.
40.Therefore, the matter is remitted back to the competent
authorities for passing fresh orders. Such an exercise is directed to
be completed within a period of twelve weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents are at liberty to
submit fresh representations or documents, if any, in the
meanwhile. Consequently, the order passed by the learned Single
Judge in W.P. (MD). Nos. 18329 & 17766 of 2022, 14453 of 2020,
16690 of 2022, 12889 of 2018, 4926 of 2020, 10214 of 2021,
19183 of 2020, 24920 & 17483 of 2019, 17406 of 2022, 18867 of
2019, 723 of 2022, 17221 of 2019, 1336 & 13792 of 2021, 16213
of 2022, 25448, 7820 & 7821 of 2019 and 16835 of 2022, dated
02.09.2022 and the impugned orders in the Writ proceedings are
set aside and the Writ Appeals stand allowed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed."
6.It was further submitted that in compliance of the judgment and order
passed in W.A.(MD) No.2097 of 2023, dated 11.12.2023, the first
respondent/the Chief Educational Officer, Kanyakumari, has considered the
claim and grievances of the petitioner and vide order dated 13.05.2025, has
rejected the claim of the petitioner on merits and in accordance with law. In
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/07/2025 02:09:09 pm )
this regard, he filed an affidavit of compliance of the first respondent, dated
08.07.2025, annexing a copy of the decision taken by the first respondent,
dated 13.05.2025. In paragraph No.8 of the compliance affidavit, the
aforesaid fact has been clearly stated, which reads as under:-
“8. In obedience to the order made in W.A.(MD) No.2097 of
2023 dated 11.12.2023, the Chief Educational Officer, Kanyakumari
vide proceedings dated 13.05.2025 made in Na.Ka.No.
7884/Aal/2019 considered the claim of the petitioner on merits in
accordance with law thereby rejected the same. Thus the order
passed by this Hon'ble Court has been complied in letter and spirit.”
7.Thus, the learned Additional Government Pleader submits that the
judgment and order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.18867 of 2019,
dated 02.09.2022 and in W.A.(MD) No.2097 of 2023, dated 11.12.2023 has
been fully complied with. Thus, he submits that the respondents may be
discharged from the present contempt proceedings, as the judgment and
order of this Court dated 02.09.2022 and 11.12.2023 has been fully complied
with, vide order dated 13.05.2025.
8.The compliance affidavit filed by the first respondent, dated
08.07.2025 is taken on record and a copy of the same has also been given to
the learned counsel for the petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/07/2025 02:09:09 pm )
9.Mr.K.Ragatheesh Kumar for M/S.Isaac Chambers appearing for the
petitioner submits that he received a copy of the compliance affidavit filed by
the first respondent, dated 08.07.2025 along with a copy of the decision taken
by him on 13.05.2025, by which, the claim of the petitioner has been rejected
by way of a reasoned and a speaking order. Thus, he submits that he may be
given liberty to challenge the aforesaid order before the competent Court of
law. It was further submitted that as the order has been communicated to the
petitioner, he has no objection if the respondents are discharged from the
present contempt proceedings and the present Contempt Petition may also
be disposed of.
10.Accordingly, in view of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the parties, after perusal of the judgment and order passed in
W.P.(MD) No.18867 of 2019, dated 02.09.2022 and in W.A.(MD) No.2097 of
2023, dated 11.12.2023 and the compliance affidavit filed by the first
respondent, dated 08.07.2025, annexing a copy of the decision taken by the
first respondent, dated 13.05.2025, this Court is satisfied that the direction
issued by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.18867 of 2019, dated 02.09.2022 and in
W.A.(MD) No.2097 of 2023, dated 11.12.2023 has been fully complied with by
the respondents and no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the
present contempt proceedings against the respondents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/07/2025 02:09:09 pm )
11.Accordingly, the Contempt Petition is finally disposed of with liberty
to the petitioner to challenge the aforesaid order of the first respondent, dated
13.05.2025, by which, the petitioner's claim was rejected by way of a
reasoned and a speaking order, before the competent Court of law, if he is
aggrieved by the decision taken by the respondents and the respondents are
discharged from the present contempt proceedings. The file is consigned to
record. No costs.
Index :Yes / No 08.07.2025
Internet :Yes / No
mm
To
1.The Chief Educational Officer,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
2.The District Educational Officer,
Marthandam, Kanyakumari District
Previously
The District Educational Officer,
Kuzhithurai,
Kanyakumari District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/07/2025 02:09:09 pm )
SHAMIM AHMED, J.
mm
08.07.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/07/2025 02:09:09 pm )
