IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 4.2.2008 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Contempt Petition No.779 of 1999 The National Council of YMCA of India rep. by its National General Secretary Mr.T.Thomas Bharat Yuvak Bhavan No.1, Jaisingh Road New Delhi 110 001 .. Petitioner vs. 1. Rajaseeli John Principal (Under Suspension) YMCA College of Physical Education Nandavam, Chennai 600 035 2. Daniel Gunanithi I.A.S. (Retd.,) 59, 23rd Cross Street, Besant Nagar, Chennai 600 090 3. S.Thangadurai D.7, Anubhav Garden 24, Velachery Road Little Mount, Saidapet Chennai 600 015 4. K.Pandian @ K.Appavoo Pandy 86, L.B.Road, Thiruvanmiyur Chennai 600 041 5. M.R.Reddy Physiotherapist Hotel Part Sheraton Creenways Road Chennai 6. H.Mohamed Kasheeb Inspector of Police Law and Order Saidapet Ji Police Station Chennai 600 015 .. Respondents The Contempt Petition has been filed under Section 10 & 12 of The Contempt of Courts Act, 70/71, to punish the respondents for their wilful disobedience of the order dated 20.8.1998, in W.P.No.9781 of 1998, and for their wilful interference in the administration of justice. For petitioner : Mr.V.Sankaranarayanan O R D E R
The above contempt petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to punish the respondents under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for their wilful disobedience of the order, dated 20.8.1998, in W.P.No.9781 of 1998.
2. It is stated that the said writ petition No.9781 of 1998, had been filed praying for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records and to quash the order, dated 16.6.1998 in Ref.No.C.C.S.02/98 on the file of the first respondent and to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service as Principal of the YMCA College of Physical Education, Nandanam, Madras. By an order, dated 20.8.1998, this Court had issued certain directions. Paragraph 31 of the said order reads as follows:
“31. But, in view of my direction in W.P.No.9781 of 1998, I do not want to remit the matter again to the Authorities for reconsideration of the request. I declare that the order dated 16.6.1998 is valid. My direction that she will not be entertained in service till the entire disciplinary proceedings are completed and final orders are passed, and my further direction that she will be entitled to full emoluments and also arrears of salary, if any, shall be complied with in all their seriousness. Petitioner in W.P.No.9781 of 1998, is prohibited from causing any obstruction to the respondents or their subordinates in managing the institution. Both the writ petitions are disposed of as indicated above. No costs. Connected W.M.Ps. are closed.”
3. The present contempt petition has been filed stating that the directions issued by this Court in its order, dated 20.8.1998, had been wilfully disobeyed giving rise to the present contempt petition.
4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents denying the claims made by the petitioner.
5. At the stage of the hearing of the contempt petition, it has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that certain orders have been passed by this Court in Sub Application Nos.284 and 285 of 1999 in the present contempt petition. This Court by an order, dated 3.1.2000, had allowed both the Sub applications. Paragraphs 18 and 19 of the said order read as follows:
“18. There will be an order of injunction restraining the respondents 1 to 5 and their men, agents from entering into the campus of the YMCA College of Physical Education, Nandanam, Madras and indulging in any criminal acts. Sub Application No.284 of 1999 is allowed.
19. For the very same reason which I have stated earlier, I feel it is only proper that the order is to be implemented in all its seriousness for maintaining discipline in the institution. Taking into consideration the interest of institution, Sub-Application 285 of 1999 is also allowed.”
6. It has also been stated by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that by the order passed by this Court in the sub applications, police protection had also been granted for implementing the order of injunction and accordingly, the respondents in the present contempt petition had been prevented by the order of injunction from interfering in the administration of the petitioner Institution. In such circumstances, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that no further orders are required to be passed in the contempt petition.
7. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this contempt petition stands closed. Consequently, connected Sub Application No.297 of 1999 is also closed. No costs.
lan
To:
1. Rajaseeli John
Principal (Under Suspension)
YMCA College of Physical Education
Nandavam, Chennai 600 035
2. Daniel Gunanithi I.A.S. (Retd.,)
59, 23rd Cross Street,
Besant Nagar, Chennai 600 090
3. S.Thangadurai
D.7, Anubhav Garden
24, Velachery Road
Little Mount, Saidapet
Chennai 600 015
4. K.Pandian @ K.Appavoo Pandy
86, L.B.Road, Thiruvanmiyur
Chennai 600 041
5. M.R.Reddy
Physiotherapist
Hotel Part Sheraton
Creenways Road, Chennai
6. H.Mohamed Kasheeb
Inspector of Police
Law and Order
Saidapet Ji Police Station
Chennai 600 015.