Cont.P(MD)No.2104 of 2017 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.2104 of 2017 1. V.Manickaraja S/o.R.Vellaikannu, No.11/23, Azad Road, Chettiyappatti Post, Manaparai Tk, Trichy District ... Petitioner(s) in CONT P(MD). 2104/ 2017 - Vs. - 1. Mr.Vashishta Johri The Union of India Rep.By the General Manager, Southern Railway, Park Town, Chennai. 2. Mr.R.Kannan Divisional Personnel Manager, (Co-Ordination), Divisional Office, Personnel Branch, Southern Railway, Madurai. 3. Mr.S.Sivanathan Assistant Personnel Manager, Divisional Office, Personnel Branch, Southern Railway, Madurai. 4. Mr.Pirasanna Kumar Chief Medical Director, Office of the Chief Medical Director, Railway Hospital, Perambur, Chennai-23. ... Respondent(s) in CONT P(MD). 2104/ 2017 Prayer :Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 To punish the contemnors / respondent herein for willfully disobeying the order dated 08/02/2017 in WP.No.4215 of 2015 on the file of this Court. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P(MD)No.2104 of 2017 For Petitioner : M/s.N.Mohan For Respondents : Mr.K.Govindarajan Deputy Solicitor General ORDER (Order of the Court was made by C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.) The petitioner had filed the contempt petition stating that the order in WP(MD) No.4125 of 2015 dated 08.02.2017 had not been complied with by the respondents. 2. The father of the petitioner was working as a Key Man in the year 2012 and a Scheme had been introduced for voluntary retirement scheme with a request for appointment of a Ward in the respondent. The father had availed the scheme. The petitioner sought employment. He had filed the writ petition seeking a mandamus. The Division Bench had directed consideration of his application. That was in the year 2017. It is not known whether as on date, the request of the application of the petitioner had been considered favourably or had been rejected. If it had been rejected, the petitioner will have to work out his remedy in the appropriate manner. If it had been considered positively, the petitioner should discharge his duties as https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P(MD)No.2104 of 2017 an employee of the respondent. As on date, the present status is not known. 3. The contempt petition stands closed with liberty to take appropriate steps on getting appropriate instructions regarding the status of the petitioner. (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.2104 of 2017 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J AND R.SAKTHIVEL, J RR Cont.P.(MD)No.2104 of 2017 14.07.2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis