Madras High Court
K.Subbarayan vs Harmander Sing on 2 March, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIR 2020 (NOC) 729 (MAD.), AIRONLINE 2020 MAD 459
Author: Subramonium Prasad
Bench: Subramonium Prasad
Cont.P.No.2194 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.03.2020
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Cont.P.No.2194 of 2019
in
WP.No.1018 of 2013
K.Subbarayan ..Petitioner
Vs.
Harmander Sing, I.A.S.,
The Secretary to Government
Municipal Administration and Water
Supply Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009. ..Respondent
Prayer : This Contempt petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt
of Court Act, praying to punish the respondent for his willful disobedience
in not complying with the order of this Hon'ble Court dated 12.04.2019
made in W.P.No.1018 of 2013.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.R.Nixon
For Respondent : Mr.M.Ezhumalai, Govt.Advocate
1/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
Cont.P.No.2194 of 2019
ORDER
The petitioner has filed in the instant contempt petition for willful disobedience of the order dated 12.04.2019 passed in WP.No.1018 of 2013. The writ petition was one for a mandamus directing the respondents to execute outright sale of the writ petitioner's houses in respect of Door Nos.10, 14 and 6 Anna Nagar, Namakkal Road, Rasipuram 637 408, in their favour, according to the market rate fixed as per the principles stipulated under the LIG Housing Scheme of Government of India based on the resolution passed by the 3rd respondent in resolution No.371, dated 17.02.1995.
2. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to give one more representation to the Government and to issue further direction to the Government to consider the representation of the petitioner for the sale of properties. While granting the relief to the petitioner, this Court took a view that the Government had passed a G.O.Ms.No.730, Rural Development and Local Administration Department 2/8 http://www.judis.nic.in Cont.P.No.2194 of 2019 dated 14.04.1976, and all the benefits of the G.O were given to certain similarly placed persons, whereas the petitioners were not extended the same benefits. Pursuant to the order, representations were made. The Government has considered the representations given by the writ petitioners. By a letter No.19646/MA-V(2)/2019-2 dated 04.10.2019. The Government has rejected the claim of the petitioners. Paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 of the said Government letter is reproduced hereunder:-
"6. In the connection, I am to inform that the independent houses were constructed, during the year 1957 for the employees of Rasipuram Municipality, as rental quarters. The Government had banned the sale, gift of land and buildings to the Municipal employees or other public servants etc., in the G.O.(Ms).No.730, Rural Development and Local Administration Department, dated 14.04.1976. Further in the Government Letter (Ms) No. 183, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 21.03.1997, the Government instructed that no Municipal Council should pass resolution in favour of individual for outright sale of quarters belonging to Corporations, Municipalities.
7. But, the ban imposed by the Government was relaxed in certain cases, for instance in G.O.(Ms).No.653, Rural Development and Local Administration Department dated 16.04.1977, the Government permitted the Erode Municipal Council to sell the 66 3/8 http://www.judis.nic.in Cont.P.No.2194 of 2019 houses to the respective occupants as resolved in its resolution No. 769 dated 27.09.1968, subject to the conditions specified in that resolution. In this case, the above said resolution was passed by the Erode Municipal Council on 27.09.1968 which was well before the imposition of ban in G.O.(Ms).No.730,Rural Development and Local Administration Department, dated 14.04.1976.
8. Further, in this issue, out of 20 houses built in Rasipuram Municipality, 4 houses were already sold to the occupants, now 16 houses are only available for the purpose of allotment to the working staff of the Municipality as staff quarters. The Municipal Commissioner, Rasipuram Municipality has informed that the working staffs are repeatedly make a request for allotment of staff quarters on rental basis. It may also be pointed out that the G.O's (relaxation of ban) referred by the petitioner were issued 40 years ago."
3. Mr.A.R.Nixon, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the order is nothing but merely a lip service of the order of this Court and despite the order passed by this Court, no possible reason has been given by the Government as to why it has not executed the sale deed in favour of the petitioners. He would state that it is well settled that mere lip service of the order of this Court cannot absolve to the authorities from been 4/8 http://www.judis.nic.in Cont.P.No.2194 of 2019 proceeded with under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the contemnor would contend that the representation of the petitioners were considered and the order dated 04.10.2019 has been passed after due application of mind. He would state that the Government in letter (Ms) No.183, Municipal Administration and Water supply Department, dated 21.03.1997 had instructed that no municipal council should pass resolution in favour of the individuals for outright sale of quarters belonging to the Corporations. He would further state that the order also records that only 16 houses are available for the purpose of allotment to the working staff of the municipality as staff quarters and requests have been made by staff to take the quarters on rental basis. He would further state in view of the fact that there is a shortage of accommodation for the staff of the municipality, there cannot be a sale in favour of the petitioners.
5. In view of the letter dated 04.10.2019 and the contentions raised by the counsel for the respondent, it cannot be said that there is a willful 5/8 http://www.judis.nic.in Cont.P.No.2194 of 2019 disobedience of the order of this Court. In view of the above, no contempt has made out. Needless to say, it is always open to the writ petitioner to challenge the order dated 04.10.2019 by taking steps in accordance with law. Accordingly, the contempt petition is closed.
02.03.2020 Index: Yes Speaking order pkn 6/8 http://www.judis.nic.in Cont.P.No.2194 of 2019 To Mr.Harmander Sing, I.A.S., The Secretary to Government Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.
7/8 http://www.judis.nic.in Cont.P.No.2194 of 2019 SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.
pkn Cont.P.No.2194 of 2019 02.03.2020 8/8 http://www.judis.nic.in