B MASTHAN RAO Vs. JUSTICE A RAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard both sides.

(2.) This contempt application is filed to punish the respondent who is the Commissioner appointed by this Court to administer the Alwarpet Benefit Fund Limited, Chennai-18 for having allegedly disobeyed the directions of this court in WPMP No.2191 of 2007 in W.P.No.14577 of 1999, dated 1.12.2008.

(3.) When the contempt petition came up on 13.3.2009, this court ordered notice to be served on the respondent. Accordingly, a registered notice was sent by the petitioner both to respondent as well as the counsel appearing for the Commissioner. When the matter came up on 17.6.2010, it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.P.Subbareddy that they are not interested in pursuing the contempt petition and that the matter has been settled in the writ appeal. Therefore, they may be permitted to withdraw the contempt petition. When once notice was directed to be served on respondent, it is not as if the petitioner can withdraw the contempt petition at his will. In any contempt proceedings, the petitioner's role is only in the nature of an informer and after setting the law in motion, he can only assist the court. In view of the fact that the petitioner has filed a frivolous and vexatious petition against a retired Judge of this court, who is functioning under the orders of this court to administer the Alwarpet Benefit Fund Ltd, this court did not want to close the proceedings without inflicting cost on the petitioner.