This contempt petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to punish the respondents for contempt of Court for their wilfull disobedience of the order passed by this Court, on 28.6.2006, in W.P.(MD) No.3975 of 2006, subsequently, modified by an order, dated 13.12.2006, made in M.P.No.1 of 2006, in W.P.(MD) No.3975 of 2006.
2. The writ petition had been filed praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 2 to 4 therein, to cause removal of the cesspool from its location in the premises bearing Door No.11, Vellalar Middle School, Watrap, Srivilliputhur Taluk, Virudhungar District. This Court, by an order, dated 28.6.2006, made in W.P.(MD) No.3975 of 2006, had directed the third respondent to consider the complaint, dated 23.9.2005, made by the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 32 of the Tamil Nadu Public Health Act, 1939, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said complaint, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to the fifth respondent. Thereafter, by an order, dated 13.12.2006, made in M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2006, in W.P.(MD) No.3975 of 2006, had modified the earlier order, since there was no official designated as Health Officer. Therefore, the petitioner had been directed to send a copy of the complaint, dated 23.9.2005, to the second respondent therein, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order and the second respondent had been directed to consider the same, on merits and in accordance with, and to pass orders thereon, within a period of four weeks thereafter.
3. The present contempt petition has been filed stating that, in spite of the directions issued by this Court, by its orders, dated 28.6.2006 and 13.12.2006, instead of taking action, under section 32 of the Tamil Nadu Public Health Act, 1939, the respondent, the Deputy Director of Public Health, Virudhunagar, had sent a communication, dated 31.1.2007, stating that the respondent is awaiting the water analysis report.
4. It has been further stated that there is no necessity for the Deputy Director of Public Health to wait for the water analysis report, once it is found that a cesspool has been located contravening the provisions found in Section 32 of the Tamil Nadu Public Health Act, 1939. Therefore, it is clear that the respondents in the present contempt petition have wilfully disobeyed the directions issued by this Court, in its orders, dated 28.6.2006 and 13.12.2006.
5. In the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, it has been stated that the petitioner had obtained an order from this Court, in W.P.(MD) No.3975 of 2006, by suppressing certain material facts. The petitioner had, in fact, filed a suit against the fifth respondent in the writ petition, in O.S.No.420 of 1991, before the Principal District Munsif Court, Sirvilliputtur, seeking for declaration and mandatory injunction to remove the cesspool situated in the fifth respondent's house. The suit had been dismissed, on merits, on 6.4.1992. Against the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.420 of 1991, the writ petitioner had filed an appeal, in A.S.No.325 of 1993, before the Principal District Court, virudhunagar District, at Srivilliputtur, and it had been dismissed, on 24.1.1996. Thereafter, the writ petitioner had filed a Consumer Original Petition No.28 of 1993, before the Consumer Disputes and Redressal Forum, Srivilliputtur, praying for compensation for not removing the said cesspool situated in the fifth respondent's premises. The said petition had been dismissed, on 30.5.1994. Thereafter, the writ petitioner had filed an appeal before the State Consumer Forum, in A.P.No.594 of 1994. The said appeal had been dismissed, on 23.12.1994. However, without disclosing the above facts, the petitioner had moved this court, by filing a writ petition, in W.P.(MD).No.3975 of 2006.
6. It has also been stated that on receipt of the notice from the Deputy Director of Health Services, the respondent Town Panchayat had issued a notice to the fifth respondent in the writ petition, on 12.11.2007, and had sought for an explanation from him. It has been further stated that the Joint Director of Health Services, Sivakasi, had issued a reply, on 31.1.2007, categorically stating that action would be taken on the complaint made by the writ petitioner, after the production of the water analysis report from the concerned authorities. However, the writ petitioner had not taken steps to comply with the order of the Joint Director of Health Services, till date. In fact, a show cause notice had been issued by the second respondent, to the fifth respondent, based on the letter issued by the Deputy Director of Health Services, Sivakasi. As such, the necessary steps had been taken by the respondent, pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, by its orders, dated 28.6.2006, and 13.12.2006. Hence, the contempt petition filed by the petitioner is devoid of merits and therefore, it is liable to be dismissed.
7. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner, as well as the respondents and on a perusal of the records available, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has not shown sufficient cause or reason to punish the respondent for contempt of court, as prayed for by the petitioner, in the present contempt petition.
8. From the records available before this Court, it is found that sufficient steps had been taken by the respondents, pursuant to the directions issued by this Court. Further, there is nothing shown on behalf of the petitioner to substantiate his claim that the respondents had wilfully disobeyed the directions issued by this Court, by its orders, dated 28.6.2006 and 13.12.2006. Further, it is seen that the petitioner has suppressed the fact that civil proceedings had been initiated before the appropriate Civil Court and for awarding of compensation before the concerned consumer fora. Further, the petitioner has not submitted the water analysis report, in respect of the cesspool, said to be in the premises of the fifth respondent in the writ petition, as required by the authorities concerned. In such circumstances, this Court does not find any reason to punish the respondents for contempt of Court. As such, the contempt petition is devoid of merits. Hence, it is dismissed. No costs.
lan To:
1. Malathi Deputy Director of Public Health Virudhunagar District Virudhunagar
2. Gnanaguru, Executive Officer Watrap Town Panchayat, Watrap Virudhunagar District.