LAWS(MAD)-2006-6-23

N PALANIAMMAL Vs. ANTONY JAYARAJ

Decided On June 30, 2006
N.PALANIAMMAL Appellant
V/S
ANTONY JAYARAJ Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present application has been filed under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act alleging that there has been wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 9. 8. 2002 in W. P. NO. 8155 of 1995.

(2.) THE present applicant had filed W. P. No. 8155 of 1995 claiming reinstatement in service with full backwages and other attendant benefits. By order dated 9. 8. 2002, the writ petition was allowed in the following terms: -"24. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be reinstated with continuity of service and further a sum of Rs. 15,000/- shall be paid towards back-wages. The direction regarding reinstatement should be carried out within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. " thereafter, the present contempt petition has been filed by the successful writ petitioner.

(3.) THE basic allegations are to the effect that even though the applicant was allowed to attend office, she was not allowed to attend any work nor she was paid monthly salary. It has been further stated that she was compelled by the respondent-management to give an undertaking that she would not claim any monetary compensation as per the order of the High Court dated 9. 8. 2002. A lawyer's notice had been issued by the applicant on 8. 3. 2003 calling upon the management to allow the applicant to carry on her work and pay her regular salary every month from the date of her reinstatement and also pay her backwages of Rs. 15,000/- as directed by the High Court. Despite the receipt of such lawyer's notice, the respondent did not take any positive steps to comply with the order dated 9. 8. 2002.