Case Note & Summary
The contempt petition was filed by S. Susila under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 alleging willful disobedience and intentional failure to comply with the order dated 22.04.2022 passed by the High Court in W.P.No.34069 of 2019. The respondent was the Government of Tamil Nadu represented by the Additional Secretary, Public (Political Pension) Department. The petitioner contended that the directions contained in the order dated 22.04.2022 had not been complied with. Subsequent to the filing of the contempt petition, the State preferred writ appeals, being W.A.Nos.2358 and 2359 of 2024, against the order dated 22.04.2022. By order dated 05.08.2024, the writ appeals were disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider certain representations dated 03.11.2001 and 21.06.2005 in light of the recommendations made by the State Level Screening Committee. Pursuant to that direction, the representations were disposed of by an order dated 16.08.2024. Being aggrieved by that order, the petitioner filed a fresh writ petition, W.P.No.27675 of 2024, which was pending before the High Court. The court noted that in view of these developments, particularly the passing of the order in the writ appeals and the subsequent disposal of the representations, the contempt petition had become infructuous. The court observed that much water had flown under the bridge and that the contempt petition had worked itself out. Consequently, the court held that no further orders were necessary in the contempt petition and that the petitioner could pursue the remedy in the newly filed writ petition. Accordingly, the contempt petition was closed without any order as to costs. The decision closed the contempt proceedings without any finding of contempt, leaving the petitioner to agitate the merits of the fresh order in the pending writ petition.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Willful Disobedience - Discontinuance of Contempt Proceedings - Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Section 11 - The contempt petition alleging non-compliance of order dated 22.04.2022 in W.P.No.34069 of 2019 was rendered infructuous as the State filed Writ Appeals and the representations were disposed by order dated 16.08.2024, which order was then challenged in a fresh writ petition. The Court held that the contempt petition has worked itself out and the petitioner may pursue remedy in the pending writ petition. Held that the contempt petition is closed with no costs. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the contempt petition should be closed in light of subsequent developments including disposal of representations and the filing of a fresh writ petition
Final Decision
The contempt petition is closed. No costs. Petitioner may pursue remedy in the pending writ petition W.P.No.27675 of 2024.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Contempt petition becomes infructuous when the underlying order has been superseded by subsequent orders and the petitioner has filed a fresh writ petition challenging the new order
- contempt proceedings may be closed with liberty to pursue pending proceedings
