Contempt proceedings stand closed upon record of full compliance and acknowledgment of order implementation.

The petitioner, an Assistant Director (Official Language) (In-charge) at Doordarshan Kendra, Thiruvananthapuram, filed this Contempt Petition alleging non-compliance with the Tribunal's order dated 08.09.2023 in O.A. No. 180/00233/2016 [Annexure P1].

The matter involved the revision of pay scales and pay fixation of the petitioner, which was further subject to a judgment by the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in OP(CAT) No. 170 of 2024 dated 02.12.2024 [Annexure P4].

During the pendency of the contempt proceedings, the respondents issued an office order dated 10.12.2025 and filed due-drawn statements reflecting the implementation of the pay revision.

Whether the respondents willfully disobeyed the directions issued by the Tribunal in O.A No. 180/00233/2016 regarding the petitioner's pay fixation and arrears

The Tribunal exercised its jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, read with Section 17 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

The primary principle applied is that contempt proceedings are intended to ensure the majesty of the law through the implementation of judicial orders; once substantial compliance is demonstrated and acknowledged by the aggrieved party, the "cause of action" for contempt ceases to exist.

The Tribunal evaluated the compliance documents submitted by the 1st respondent, specifically the office order dated 10.12.2025 and the accompanying due-drawn statements.

The respondents’ counsel argued that the directions regarding pay fixation and the resulting financial benefits had been fully executed.

The petitioner’s counsel, upon reviewing the submitted records (including Annexures R-V to R-VII, which were signed as received by the applicant), formally acknowledged that the order had been complied with.

Given that the petitioner admitted to the receipt of the benefits and the rectification of the pay scale as per the original order, the Tribunal found no further grounds to maintain the contempt notice.

Consequently, the Contempt Petition was closed, and the notice issued to the respondents was discharged.

No costs were awarded.