Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

1909 DAILYLAW 434 (MAD)

N. Manikandan v. Chitra Vijayan IAS

CONT P(MD)/1909/2026 · 2026-07-14

C V Karthikeyan, R Sakthivel

Transfer Petitionbody1909

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Cont.P(MD)No.1909 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.07.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL Cont.P.(MD)No.1909 of 2026 1. N. Manikandan S/o. Nagarajan, Door No.11, Thirusulakaliyamman Kovil Street, Thandakaranpatti, Palanganatham, Madurai South, Madurai -625003. ... Petitioner(s) in CONT P(MD). 1909/ 2026 - Vs. - 1. Chitra Vijayan Ias The Commissioner, Madurai Municipal Corporation, Aringar Anna Maligai, Madurai -625 002. ... Respondent(s) in CONT P(MD). 1909/ 2026 Prayer in CONT P(MD). 1909/ 2026 :Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the contennor for her willful and wanton disobedince of the order passed by this Honourable Court in WP(MD) No. 10978/2026 dated 17.04.2026. For Petitioner : M/s.Gokul Abimanyu For Respondents : Mr.B.Saravanan Addl.Advocate General Mr.S.Vinayak https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P(MD)No.1909 of 2026 ORDER (Order of the Court was made by C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.) The contempt petition has been filed complaining that the directions issued by this Court on 17.04.2026 as interim directions have been violated by the respondent/Madurai Corporation. 2. The writ petition thereafter came up for further hearing on 11.06.2026, where a Contractor, who had been appointed and who had commenced commercial activities, had been impleaded as the 3rd respondent in the writ petition. 3. Today, it is contended by the learned Additional Advocate General, on Instructions, that the Madurai Corporation has taken a decision to cancel the contract and to refund the amount paid by the 3rd respondent, who had been impleaded in the writ petition. This would put an end to the commercial activities introduced by the 3rd respondent in the writ petition. Page 2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P(MD)No.1909 of 2026 4. It is, however, stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there are other shops wherein water is sold in bottles, which are purchased and the bottles are thrown in all over the place. It is also contended that food items are also sold and the the litter is sprayed all over the place. To that extent, let the Corporation authorities ensure that water bottles are not sold, but if somebody wants to have water, they can get them in paper cups. There should be number of dustbins, wherein the paper cups could be put. Let there not be sale of food items, which will again be a source for litter to occur. Let the respondents ensure that these steps are taken. 5. Let a status report be filed with respect to the contract entered into with the 3rd respondent in the writ petition. 6. Though the contempt petition stands closed, the rights of the petitioner to reopen the contempt petition by filing a sub application is always kept open. Page 3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P(MD)No.1909 of 2026 7. List the main writ petition for hearing on 04.08.2026. (C.V.K.,J.) (R.S.V,J.) 14.07.2026 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No RR https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P(MD)No.1909 of 2026 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J AND R.SAKTHIVEL, J RR Cont.P.(MD)No.1909 of 2026 14.07.2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis