Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 3206 (MAD)

M. S. Muthu v. M. Rejendran, IAS

2014-09-10

M.VENUGOPAL

body2014
Judgment : 1. The Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent brings it to the notice of this Court that the order of this Court dated 24.02.2014 in W.P.No.32447 of 2012 has been complied with as per the proceedings dated 18.08.2014 of the Joint Director of Agriculture, Tuticorin. However, this fact is not accepted by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and according to the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the order of this Court passed in W.P.No.32447 of 2012 has been complied with only in partial terms and not in letter and spirit. 2. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner brings it to the notice of this Court that the Petitioner is entitled to get regularisation from the year 1999, but in the proceedings dated 18.08.2014 of the Joint Director of Agriculture, Tuticorin, the benefit was granted to the Petitioner with effect from 01.10.2001. In any event, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of this Court to work out his remedy and for the present, prays for closure of the Contempt Petition and also to that effect has made an endorsement in the Contempt Petition No.2221 of 2014. 3. Recording the aforesaid fact and the endorsement so made by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, this Court, in the interest of justice, permits the Petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate Forum in the manner known to Law and in accordance with Law and for the present closes the Contempt Petition. 4. With the above observation, this Contempt Petition is closed.