Madras High Court
CONT P(MD)/3039/2026 of Revathy Vs Nishanth Krishna, I.A.S. on 25 September 2026
CONT P(MD) No. 3039 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 25-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
CONT P(MD) No. 3039 of 2026
in
W.P.(MD)No.14970 of 2024
CNR:{HCMD011290082026}
Revathy
W/o.Late.Nallamareddy,
No.8-5-1/5, Middle Street,
Neerethan, L.Pudur,
Vadipatti Taluk,
Madurai District-625 218
..Petitioner(s)/
Petitioner
Vs
1. Nishanth Krishna, I.A.S.,
The District Collector/Monitoring Committee Office of the District Collectorate, Madurai, Madurai District.
2. Karunakaran
The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Office of the District Collectorate, Madurai, Madurai District
3. Ramachandran
The Tahsildar,
Vadipatti Taluk,
Madurai District-625 218
..Contemnors
/Respondent(s)
CONT P(MD) No. 3039 of 2026
Prayer : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the contemnors/respondents 1 to 3 herein for their deliberate and willful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 23.04.2025 in Writ Petition (MD)No.14970 of 2024 amounting to Contempt of Court under Article 215 of the Constitution of India r/w. Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.A.Mohamed Ashfalk
For Respondent(s):
Ms.K.R.Shivashankari,
Additional Government Pleader.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by G.R.Swaminathan J.) Heard both sides.
2. Pursuant to the order dated 23.04.2025 passed by this Bench, the Tahsildar, Vadipatti had passed the order dated 07.07.2026 rejecting the petitioner’s request.
3. We are satisfied that our order has been complied with. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner wants to argue the matter on merits.
4. When the primary order which is the subject matter of contempt
CONT P(MD) No. 3039 of 2026
was not on merits, the question of going to merits in contempt jurisdiction does not really arise.
5. The petitioner is given liberty to challenge the impugned order in the manner known to law. Considering the special request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, we direct the respondents to make available the copy of “A” Register in respect of survey No.13/74. It may be served by the Government counsel on the petitioner’s counsel. This contempt petition is closed. (G.R.S.,J.) (S.S.Y.,J.) 25-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No PMU To
1. Nishanth Krishna, I.A.S., The District Collector/Monitoring Committee Office of the District Collectorate, Madurai, Madurai District
2. Karunakaran The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the District Collectorate, Madurai, Madurai District
3. Ramachandran The Tahsildar, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District-625 218
CONT P(MD) No. 3039 of 2026
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. AND S.SRIMATHY, J. PMU CONT P(MD) No. 3039 of 2026 25-09-2026