Closed contempt case alleging non-compliance of previous directions. Court noted respondent issued orders and will provide a revised certificate upon application by the petitioner.
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 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
TUESDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2010 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1932
Con.Case(C).No. 1432 of 2010(S)
AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.25719/2010 DATED 08/09/2010
PETITIONER / PETITIONER:
---------------------------------------
JEEVAN J NATH, S/O.S.JAGANATH, "SREE MOOKAMBIKA", T.C. 3/1189, S.R.NAGAR, HOUSE NO.2, NEAR N.S.S.HIGH SCHOOL, KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
BY ADVS. SMT.SREEDEVI KYLASANATH SMT.V.J.SAFEENA
RESPONDENT / 2ND RESPONDENT IN THE WRIT PETITION:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
N.NAGARAJU (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), SECRETARY, THE CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.III J. BLOCK, ANNA NAGAR, CHENNAI – 40.
BY ADV. SRI. DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, SC
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
Contempt Case (C) No. 1432 of 2010 ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 7th day of December, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Alleging non compliance of the directions in Annexure-A judgment, this petition has been filed.
Therefore, leaving it open to the petitioner to make an application to the respondent for the issuance of a revised certificate, this contempt case is closed.
Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
aks
// True Copy //
P.A. To Judge
JEEVAN J NATH
N.NAGARAJU
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
