At, High Court of Judicature at Madras
By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. JAICHANDREN
For the Petitioner: N. Ramesh, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. V.M. Velumani, Special Govt. Pleader.
(Prayer: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondents for having disobeyed the order dated 27.1.2012, made in W.P.No.1479 of 2012.)
1. This Contempt Petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to punish the respondents for having disobeyed the order passed by this Court, on 27.1.2012, in W.P.No.1479 of 2012.
2. The main contention of the petitioner is that, in spite of an order passed by this Court, on 27.1.2012, making it clear that the 1st respondent shall not prosecute the petitioner, pursuant to the impugned notice, dated 20.12.2011, until final orders are passed by him, in the Appeal filed by the petitioner, on 15.11.2011, against the order, dated 7.10.2011, the respondents have initiated the prosecution proceedings against the petitioner. Thus, the respondents have committed wilful disobedience of the order of this Court, dated 27.1.2012, made in W.P.No.1479 of 2012, and therefore, they are liable to punished.
3. An affidavit had been filed on behalf of the 1st respondent. Paragraph No.3 of the affidavit reads as follows:-
"3. It is submitted that on receipt of copy of the order of this Hon'ble Court the final order on the appeal of the petitioner was issued by the Chief Inspector of Factories on 15/2/2012 well within the specified time and the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed. The charge sheet filed on 22/12/2011 by Inspector of Factories, Ambattur, in the Honourable Chief Judicial Magistrate Court Thiruvallur, has been numbered as STC 457 of 2011 and the summons have been issued against the petitioner on 22/02/2013 and served on 22/03/2013".
In such circumstances, this Court finds that there is no wilful disobedience of the order passed, by this Court, on 27.1.2012, as no prosecution had taken place, after the said date, till the Appeal filed by the petitioner, on 15.11.2011, had been di
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
sposed of, on 15.2.2012. Only thereafter, summons had been issued to the petitioner, on 22.2.2013 and the same had been served on him, on 22.3.2013. In such circumstances, this Contempt Petition stands closed. No costs.