Madras High Court sets aside one-month simple imprisonment imposed on IAS officer Anshul Mishra in contempt proceedings

A Division Bench of the Madras High Court has set aside an order passed by a single judge who found Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer Anshul Mishra guilty of contempt of court proceedings and directed him to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.

The Division Bench comprising Justices J. Nisha Banu (now a judge of Kerala High Court) and S. Sounthar had on September 15, 2025 allowed a contempt appeal filed by the IAS officer and permitted him to withdraw ₹25,000 which he had deposited in the court while filing the appeal.

The Bench held the punishment imposed on the officer for contempt of court was unwarranted since he had complied with the order passed by the single judge in writ proceedings even before the issuance of statutory notice to him in the contempt of court petition.

It, however, expressed “strong displeasure over the undue delay (of more than 18 months) in complying with the court order.” Authoring the order, Justice Banu also wrote: “The delay in complying with the direction has to be viewed seriously in the absence of genuine reasons.”

The issue relates to a 2003 writ petition filed by elderly siblings R. Lalithambal and K.S. Viswananthan who had been struggling for years to retrieve their valuable immovable property acquired for a public purpose but reportedly not used for the same.

According to the siblings, 17 cents of their land abutting Nesapakkam Road in Chennai was acquired in 1983 for constructing Tamil Nadu Housing Board tenements. However, when the land was not utilised for long, the petitioners initiated a legal battle seeking reconveyance of the property.

Pursuant to a writ petition filed in 2003, followed by contempt proceedings, about 10.5 cents of the land was reconveyed to them but the rest of 6.5 cents was retained for the purpose of widening the Nesapakkam Road. Again, the siblings kickstarted a second round of litigation to get back the remaining property.

Disposing of their second writ petition on November 22, 2023, Justice P. Velmurugan of the High Court had directed the CMDA Member Secretary to consider the couple’s plea and pass appropriate orders within two months. However, since the order was not complied with, the siblings filed a contempt plea in 2024.

Justice Velmurugan had issued statutory notice, requiring the physical presence of Mr. Mishra in the court, on March 13, 2025 and found him guilty of contempt on April 28, 2025. Apart from undergoing imprisonment, the officer was also directed to pay a compensation of ₹25,000 to the siblings from his personal funds.

“In numerous cases, it is seen that poor and aggrieved litigants, after approaching public authorities for redressal of genuine grievances, are forced to approach the constitutional courts for directions. Even after judicial intervention, the concerned authorities, for reasons best known to them, either delay or altogether ignore compliance, compelling the litigants to resort to contempt proceedings for enforcement of their rights,” Justice Velmurugan had said while passing orders in the contempt plea.

When the order was taken on appeal, a Division Bench of Justices M.S. Ramesh (since retired) and V. Lakshminarayanan had on June 12, 2025 suspended the sentence of one month simple imprisonment and directed the officer to deposit ₹25,000 with the Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court without prejudice to his service records and until the disposal of the appeal.