LAWS(MAD)-2008-8-205

N SUSEELA Vs. DINABANDHU I A S

Decided On August 21, 2008
N.SUSEELA Appellant
V/S
DINABANDHU, I.A.S. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides and perused the records.

(2.) THE petitioner, a physically handicapped found with 60% disability even at the time of initial appointment, was appointed as Sanitary Supervisor on 31. 08. 2001 under the Kurichi III Grade Municipality, Podanur, Coimbatore District. Having served for about 6 years as such, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents that she should be provided with a suitable alternate job as the above said disability, according to her, proved to be a hindrance to the performance of her duties as Sanitary Supervisor. As the said representation dated 22. 09. 2007 was not favourably considered by the respondents, the petitioner approached this court by way of a writ petition in W. P. No. 55 of 2008. A learned single jungle of this court, by order dated 05. 02. 2008, allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to accommodate the petitioner in a suitable alternate post without affecting the salary drawn by her as on the date of the said order. The order also directed that the said process should be completed within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order.

(3.) COMPLAINING that the respondents have not complied with the above said direction, the petitioner has come forward with the present contempt petition praying that the respondents should be punished for their alleged act of contempt. Admittedly, the direction issued by this court was not complied with within the time granted by this court. However, the third respondent has submitted a counter affidavit on behalf of the respondents stating that, though not within the time granted by this court, the direction of this court has been complied with by providing an alternate job without any loss in the salary drawn by the petitioner as on the date of the order passed in the writ petition. The relevant plea of compliance are found in paragraph 4, 5, 6 and 9 of the counter affidavit. For proper appreciation, the said paragraphs are reproduced hereunder:-