1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (CONTEMPT JURISDICTION) WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2011 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN CONTEMPT PETITION No.1243 of 2010 ************ Hilda Mercy, No.194/MIG Housing Unit, Sri Nagar, Coonoor 2. ... Petitioner Vs 1)M.Kutralingam, I.A.S., Secretary, (Education Department), Fort St. George, Chennai 9. 2)Suganthi, The District Educational Officer, Arignar Anna Campus, Coonoor, Nilgiri District 643 102. 3)Bro.Johnson, The Head Master & Correspondent, St. Antony's Higher Secondary School, Coonoor 643 101, Nilgiri District. ... Respondents (Cont.Petition closed against 1st respondent as per order dated 22/09/2010 in Cont.P.No.1243/2010) Contempt Petition praying that this Court be pleased to punish the respondents for not obeying the order of this Hon'ble Court dated 23/09/2008 and made in W.P.No.15320 of 2008. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 The above Contempt Petition coming on this day before this Court for hearing in the presence of M/s.K.Bhawatharini, Advocate for the petitioner herein; and of Mrs.Dakshayani Reddy, Additional Government Pleader for the respondents herein; and upon reading the petition and affidavit of Hilda Mercy, filed herein; the Court made the following order:- The present contempt application was taken out alleging violation of the orders of this Court, made in W.P.No.15320 of 2008 dated 23.09.2008. 2. In and by the said order, I have directed the respondents 2 and 3 in the said writ petition to consider the grievance of the petitioner as put forth by her in her representation dated 28.04.2008 on merits and in accordance with law. Alleging that the said order was not complied with, the present contempt application was filed. 3. Mrs.Dakshayani Reddy, the learned Additional Government Pleader produced an order dated 14.11.2008 to show that the order was complied with. However, it is represented by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the said order was not communicated to the petitioner. There upon the learned A.G.P., was directed to produce the records to show that the said order was forwarded to the petitioner. But, the learned A.G.P., was unable to point out from the records that the said order was communicated to the petitioner by Registered Post with https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 Acknowledgment. Today, the learned A.G.P., has handed over the order referred to above to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Hence, the present contempt application stands closed. 4. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the said order in a manner known to law. Witness the Hon'ble Thiru M.YUSUF EQBAL, the Chief Justice of High Court at Madras, as aforesaid, this the 2nd day of February, 2011. 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. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 SMV CONTEMPT PETITION No.1243/2010 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN ORDER DATED : 02/02/2011 FOR APPROVAL :31/03/2011 APPROVED ON :31/03/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/