AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
16 paragraphs · 274 wordsN.Nagaresh, J
WP(C) No.11638/2016 was disposed of confirming the interim order passed by this Court on 06.04.2016. The interim order directed the
respondent-Municipality to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and the
4th respondent was directed to maintain status quo till the disposal of Ext.P7.
The petitioners have approached this Court alleging violation of the interim order and the final judgment of this Court.
Standing Counsel for the Municipality entered appearance and filed an affidavit on behalf of the 1st respondent in the Contempt Case. The 1stÂ
respondent pointed out that pursuant to the directions of this Court, an order dated 30.11.2021 has been passed by the Municipality as evidenced by
Ext.R1-1.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that status quo order was passed in the writ petition which is not being maintained now. Therefore,
the Contempt Case should be proceeded with.
I have considered the arguments raised on either side. The direction of this Court to the Municipality was to consider Ext.P7 representation and the
4th respondent to maintain status quo till the disposal of Ext.P7, as per order dated 06.04.2016. Ext.P7 has been disposed of on 30.11.2021. In that
view of the matter, the directions contained in the judgment in the writ petition are substantially complied with. No further orders are required in the
contempt case.
The Contempt of Court Case is accordingly closed. The petitioners will be at liberty to challenge Ext.R1-1 dated 30.11.2021 passed by the
Municipality, in accordance with law, if the petitioner is so advised.