Madras High Court
S.Raghupathy vs Kirlosh Kumar on 1 October, 2020
Author: S.Vaidyanathan
Bench: S.Vaidyanathan
Contempt Petition No.1283 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01.10.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
Contempt Petition No.1283 of 2013
1. S.Raghupathy
2. R.Lakshmanan ... Petitioners
vs.
1. Kirlosh Kumar, I.A.S.,
District Collector,
Cuddalore – 607 001,
Cuddalore District.
2. S.Manoharan,
District Supply and Consumer Protection Officer,
Cuddalore – 607 001,
Cuddalore District. ... Respondents
Contempt Petition filed under Order 11 of the Contempt of Courts
Act, 1971, praying to punish the Respondents herein for willfully
disobeying the order of this Court in W.P.No.29329 of 2012, dated
26.11.2012.
For Petitioners : Mr.Sedhu Madhavan
for Mr.M.Ravi
For Respondents : Mr.M.Elumalai,
Additional Government Pleader
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page No.1 of 4
Contempt Petition No.1283 of 2013
ORDER
This Contempt Petition is filed alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 26.11.2012 passed by this Court in W.P.No.29329 of 2012.
2. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, it is represented by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents that, the order under contempt was challenged in W.A.No.1889 of 2013 and the same was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 18.07.2015.
3. In view of the submissions of the learned Additional Government Pleader, Contempt will not lie against the order passed in the Writ Petition.
4. In the case of Kunhayammed vs. State of Kerala, reported in (2000 (6) SCC 359), the principle of Doctrine of Merger has been widely discussed by the Apex Court. With reference to the three-Judge ruling in Kunhayammed case and yet another decision of the Apex Court in the case of Dineshan, K.K. vs. R.K.Singh reported in (2014) 16 SCC 88, this Court is of the view that, once the order passed in a Writ Petition gets merged with the order of the Writ Appeal, the remedy available to the petitioner is to file a Contempt in the Writ Appeal and not in the Writ Petition, unless and until the Apex Court specifically directs the High http://www.judis.nic.in Page No.2 of 4 Contempt Petition No.1283 of 2013 Court to decide the issue.
5. Thus, in view of the principle of Doctrine of Merger discussed above, the present Contempt Petition cannot be adjudicated and hence, it is closed. However, if the Petitioners are aggrieved, it is open to them to work out their remedy in the manner known to law.
01.10.2020
Index : Yes/No
(aeb/jas)
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page No.3 of 4
Contempt Petition No.1283 of 2013
S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.
(aeb/jas)
Order in
Contempt Petition No.1283 of 2013
01.10.2020
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page No.4 of 4