Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

T. Subash and Others Vs. M. Sai Kumar, IAS and Others

T. Subash and Others vs M. Sai Kumar, IAS and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 10, 2016
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1179459

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Contempt Petition No. 3334 of 2014
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Contempt of Courts Act - Section 11 -

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

T. Subash and Others

Respondent

M. Sai Kumar, IAS and Others

Excerpt

contempt of courts act - section 11 -(prayer: petition filed under section 11 of the contempt of courts act, praying to punish the respondents for their act of wilful disobedience of order passed by this court in w.p.no.37024 of 2006 dated 20.06.2012.) 1. mr.s.namo narayanan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and mrs.p.rajalakshmi, learned government advocate appearing for the respondents are very much present. 2. the learned government advocate for the respondents brings it to the notice of this court that the order passed by this court in w.p.no.37024 of 2006 dated 20.06.2012 was complied with and in this regard, g.o.(2d)no.29, public works (c2) department, dated 09.02.2016 was issued. 3. a cursory perusal of the contents of the aforesaid g.o.(2d)no.29, public works (c2) department, dated 09.02.2016 at paragraph 11, reads to the following effect: 11. accordingly, the government direct that the nominal muster roll services of thiru t.subash, tmt.d.hepsi, thiru n.prasad, thiru j.john thurai singh and thiru n.rajakumar be regularised in the posts mentioned against each of them with effect from the dates and in relaxation of rules mentioned against each of them in the table at para 7 above with monetary benefit from the date of issue of orders, subject to outcome of the writ appeal filed in wasr no.91954 of 2014. the service of thiru g.ramesh, nominal muster roll employee is not regularised, since he was engaged as daily wages employee for a period of three months only. ? 4. recording the aforesaid fact, the present contempt petition is closed.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, praying to punish the respondents for their act of wilful disobedience of order passed by this Court in W.P.No.37024 of 2006 dated 20.06.2012.)

1. Mr.S.Namo Narayanan, Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mrs.P.Rajalakshmi, Learned Government Advocate appearing for the Respondents are very much present.

2. The Learned Government Advocate for the Respondents brings it to the notice of this Court that the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.37024 of 2006 dated 20.06.2012 was complied with and in this regard, G.O.(2D)No.29, Public Works (C2) Department, dated 09.02.2016 was issued.

3. A cursory perusal of the contents of the aforesaid G.O.(2D)No.29, Public Works (C2) Department, dated 09.02.2016 at paragraph 11, reads to the following effect:

11. Accordingly, the Government direct that the Nominal Muster Roll services of Thiru T.Subash, Tmt.D.Hepsi, Thiru N.Prasad, Thiru J.John Thurai Singh and Thiru N.Rajakumar be regularised in the posts mentioned against each of them with effect from the dates and in relaxation of rules mentioned against each of them in the table at para 7 above with monetary benefit from the date of issue of orders, subject to outcome of the Writ Appeal filed in WASR No.91954 of 2014. The service of Thiru G.Ramesh, Nominal Muster Roll employee is not regularised, since he was engaged as daily wages employee for a period of three months only. ?

4. Recording the aforesaid fact, the present Contempt Petition is closed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial