Justice V.Parthiban directs Commissioner of Labour, Chenai to appear before the Court
[12/11, 17:56] Sekarreporter1: Justice V.Parthiban directs Commissioner of Labour, Chenai to appear before the Court
[12/11, 18:00] Sekarreporter1: W.P.No.17578 of 2020
and
W.M.P.No.21787 of 2020
V.PARTHIBAN. J.,
This Court finds that the reasons set forth in the impugned order are directly questioning the authority of this Court by relying on a irrelevant decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, unrelated to the subject matter in issue which in the opinion of this Court, tantamounts to committing a blatant contempt of the Constitution jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, the 1st respondent (The Commissioner of Labour, Chennai-6) is directed to appear before this Court to explain why suo-motu contempt should not be taken against him by this Court. He is also to explain why exemplary costs should not be imposed against him and why the Government should not be directed to initiate disciplinary action against him for this kind of impertinent observation made in the impugned order against this Institution.
2. Mr.P.Pothiraj, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. He is directed to inform the first respondent to appear before this Court through Video Conferencing on 15.12.2020. It is made clear that the observation made by the official in the impugned order would be viewed very seriously by this Court and further action would follow after explanation from the 1st respondent.
3. Post the matter on 15.12.2020.
vsi 10.12.2020
V.PARTHIBAN. J.,
vsi
W.P.No.17578 of 2020
and
W.M.P.No.21787 of 2020
10.12.2020
W.P.No.17578 of 2020
and
W.M.P.No.21787 of 2020
V.PARTHIBAN. J.,
This Court finds that the reasons set forth in the impugned order are directly questioning the authority of this Court by relying on a irrelevant decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, unrelated to the subject matter in issue which in the opinion of this Court, tantamounts to committing a blatant contempt of the Constitution jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, the 1st respondent (The Commissioner of Labour, Chennai-6) is directed to appear before this Court to explain why suo-motu contempt should not be taken against him by this Court. He is also to explain why exemplary costs should not be imposed against him and why the Government should not be directed to initiate disciplinary action against him for this kind of impertinent observation made in the impugned order against this Institution.
2. Mr.P.Pothiraj, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. He is directed to inform the first respondent to appear before this Court through Video Conferencing on 15.12.2020. It is made clear that the observation made by the official in the impugned order would be viewed very seriously by this Court and further action would follow after explanation from the 1st respondent.
3. Post the matter on 15.12.2020.
vsi 10.12.2020
V.PARTHIBAN. J.,
vsi
W.P.No.17578 of 2020
and
W.M.P.No.21787 of 2020
10.12.2020
