Madras HC sentences IAS officer to one-month jail in contempt of court case
The court further held that the officer was liable to pay Rs 25,000 to the petitioners and in case of failure to pay the amount, the officer shall undergo further simple imprisonment of 10 days.
Madras High Court
CHENNAI: Coming down heavily on IAS officer Anshul Mishra for wilful disobedience of orders of the court, the Madras High Court held him guilty of "civil contempt" and sentenced him to undergo one-month simple imprisonment.
"The sentence of imprisonment shall stand suspended till the appeal period is over. After the appeal period is over and if no appeal is filed, the Registry is directed to take steps to secure the custody of the officer to undergo the sentence as observed," Justice P Velmurugan noted in his order based on a petition by elderly siblings, who moved the court after the CMDA failed to follow court directions in a land acquisition grievance.
The court further held that the officer was liable to pay Rs 25,000 to the petitioners and in case of failure to pay the amount, the officer shall undergo further simple imprisonment of 10 days.
"It is made clear that the compensation has to be paid from the personal salary of the respondent and the government is directed to deduct the compensation amount from his salary," the court held.
The case stemmed from the siblings' 17-cent land acquisition in 1983 for housing projects, which remained unused. After prolonged litigation, 10.5 cents were returned in 2003, while 6.5 cents were retained for road expansion. A 2023 High Court order directed CMDA to decide on re-conveying the remaining land within two months. When authorities ignored the directive, the siblings filed a contempt plea in August 2024.
Justice Velmurugan condemned systemic delays by officials, stressing that non-compliance with court orders eroded public trust and undermined the rule of law.
"Public service is not a privilege but a trust reposed in the officials by the people. Public servants are answerable not only to their immediate administrative superiors but ultimately to the law and the constitution," the court said.