Madras High Court Highlights Concerns Over Contempt Proceedings
The Madras High Court has recently expressed its dissatisfaction over the increasing cases of non-compliance with court orders, noting that contempt of court proceedings no longer seem to carry the weight they once did among government officials. This observation was made by Justice GR Swaminathan while addressing a contempt petition filed by a Veterinary Assistant Surgeon, who claimed that an interim order to stay his transfer had been disregarded.
The Case of Dr. Senthilkumar
Dr. Senthilkumar, a Veterinary Assistant Surgeon in the Tamil Nadu Animal Husbandry Department, was transferred from Dindigul to Mallavadi, Thiruvannamalai district, in June 2025. He faced another transfer to Thoothukudi in October 2025, which he challenged in the High Court leading to a stay order. However, a subsequent transfer order was issued on May 14, and on May 29, Justice Swaminathan extended the stay until July 31.
Despite submitting a representation, along with medical certificates, to rejoin duty, Dr. Senthilkumar alleged he was not permitted to do so, and his salary was withheld. This prompted him to file a contempt petition, accusing state authorities of violating the court’s interim order.
Court’s Response and Observations
During the hearing, it was revealed that IAS officer SPA Amrith served as Director of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services until July 15, when IAS officer H Krishna Unni succeeded him. Both were held accountable in the contempt case.
Justice Swaminathan expressed dissatisfaction when government counsel failed to obtain instructions from the concerned officials despite the court’s ten-minute wait. “When the Secretary to Government is the first respondent, I am shocked to note that the officials are so casual,” remarked the Court. The judge emphasized that government counsel must secure instructions in advance and either confirm compliance or provide a valid reason for non-compliance. “Mere seeking of adjournment would not suffice,” the Court stated.
More Read
Upholding the Majesty of the Court
Justice Swaminathan stressed that contempt proceedings represent the “majesty of the court” and that counsel has a duty to assist it. “The standing of the court goes down with each passing day of non-compliance,” he noted.
The judge also mentioned former Madras High Court judge Justice Battu Devanand’s stringent approach toward contempt proceedings, stating that even delayed compliance was not tolerated by him. “I feel that all of us must emulate the path shown by His Lordship,” added the Court.
Legal Representation and Proceedings
The High Court issued notices to former Director SPA Amrith and current Director H Krishna Unni. Dr. Senthilkumar was represented by Advocates M Purushothaman, N Andal Sri Shankari, R Ranganathan, and S Aravaanon. Government Counsel Suganya appeared for the Animal Husbandry Department officials named as contemnors in the case.
