Disposed
George John v. Lizy Jacob
Kerala HCCon.Case(C)/822/2007
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT :…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2007 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1929
Con.Case(C).No. 822 of 2007(S)
-----------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.21296/2000 Dated 07/08/2003
PETITIONER/3rd PARTY
GEORGE JOHN, 230, MATHER NAGAR,
KOCHI - 682 033.
BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN PULIKKAL SMT.MANJU RAJAN SMT.A.AMRUTHA VIDYADHARAN
RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3
AGE & FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
AGE & FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
AGE & FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY SR. G.P. SRI M.R.SABU
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.T. SANKARAN, J.
---------------------------------------------------------- Contempt Case (C) No.822 of 2007
Dated, this the 20th day of June, 2007
JUDGMENT
H.L. DATTU, CJ.
Alleging that the respondents have not complied with the orders and directions issued by this court in O.P.No.21296/2000 dt. 7.8.2003, the petitioners in the original petition are before us in this contempt proceedings.
“16. The provision of the Act and the Rule being clear, the State is under an obligation to ensure its compliance. The defaulters are liable to be punished. Mr. Roy Chacko has assured us that the provisions shall be enforced. As at present, the rule provides for no exception. Thus, it is directed that the respondents shall enforce the provision immediately. Instructions shall be issued. The persons concerned shall be given a reasonable time to arrange for protective headgear, say four weeks. Thereafter, the defaulters shall be dealt with according to law.”
“Refer to the Fax Message No.822/07/CC/(c) dated 8.6.2007 from Sri M.R.Sabu, Senior Government Pleader, regarding WP(C) filed by George John, 230, Mather Nagar, Kochi, complaining about non-implementation of direction
COC No.822/2007
2
contained in the judgment dated 7.8.2003 in W.P.(C) No.21296/2000.
COC No.822/2007
3
In view of the effective steps that are being taken by the respondents for implementing the orders and directions issued by this court, in our opinion, for the present we need not have to entertain any contempt proceedings against the respondent. Accordingly, the proceedings are dropped. Ordered accordingly.
H.L. DATTU, CHIEF JUSTICE.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
mt/
George John
Mrs. Lizy Jacob
Raman Srivasthava
Jiji Thomson
H.L. Dattu
K.T. Sankaran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court