1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 07.09.2011 Coram THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL Contempt Petition No.450 of 2011 N.Balagurumoorthy .. Petitioner V. 1.Thiru S.Ramasundaram The Government of Tamil Nadu Represented by the Secretary to Government Public Works Department, Fort St. George, Madras-9. 2.Thiru N.Jayaraman The Chief Engineer (General) Public Works Department, Madras – 5. .. Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, praying to punish the respondents for violating the orders of this Court in W.P.No.32618 of 2004 dated 22.02.2010. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghavachari For Respondents : Mr.V.S.Sethuraman, Additional Advocate General Asst.by For Mr.N.Visagamurthy, Govt. Advocate ORDER Mr.N.Visagamurthy, Learned Additional Advocate General submits that as against the order dated 22.02.2010 in W.P.No.32618 of 2004 passed by this Court, the Government of Tamil Nadu and two others have preferred Writ Appeal before this Court with condonation of delay Petition in W.A.SR.No.67862 of 2011. 2.Further, he brings it to the notice of this Court that M.P.No.1 of 2011 in W.A.SR.No.67862 of 2011 (Condone https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 Delay Petition) has been dismissed by the Hon'ble First Division Bench today. 3.As a matter of fact, in W.P.No.32618 of 2004, this Court on 22.02.2010, has, among other things, observed that 'the Petitioner was entitled to get his annual increments in the post of Head Drafting Officer in usual course and by passing the impugned order in G.O.ID.No.430 Public Works (C1) Department dated 10.11.1994, there was a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and when the Petitioner had put in nearly 35 years of service, his experience gained could not be snatched abruptly by means of the impugned order in G.O.I.D.No.430 Public Works (C1) Department dated 10.11.1994 and looking at from any angle, the Petitioner had made out a case for allowing the writ petition since the impugned order in G.O.I.D.No.430 dated 10.11.1994 of the first respondent was arbitrary and invalid and the same was not in accordance with law' and consequently, allowed the Writ Petition by quashing the impugned order in G.O.I.D.No.430, Public Works (C1) Department, dated 10.11.1994. 4.Moreover, the Learned Additional Advocate General produces G.O.(D).No.318, Public Works (C1) Department, dated 06.09.2011, in and by which, the Writ Petitioner (Retired) has been regularly appointed as Draughtsman Grade-III from the date of his initial appointment i.e., 5.11.1959 A.N. Therefore, it is quite evident that the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 order passed by this Court in W.P.No.32618 of 2004 dated 22.02.2010 has been complied with. 5.Inasmuch as the Respondents have complied with the orders of this Court in W.P.No.32618 of 2004 dated 22.02.2010 through G.O.(D).No.318, Public Works (C1) Department, dated 06.09.2011, no further orders are necessary and as such, the instant Contempt Petition is closed. No costs. Sgl SD/- DEPUTY REGISTRAR (OS) //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2011. COURT OFFICER (O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the orders/judgments/Decrees in this format. KS(CO) SMV/27/09/2011 To 1.Thiru S.Ramasundaram The Government of Tamil Nadu Represented by the Secretary to Government Public Works Department, Fort St. George, Madras-9. 2.Thiru N.Jayaraman The Chief Engineer (General) Public Works Department, Madras – 5. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/