Court closed a contempt case alleging non-compliance with a prior judgment directing salary payment, due to a stay order on the placement approval via a pending writ petition filed by the State.
Contempt case closed without prejudice to petitioner's right to seek restoration if the stay order is lifted.
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 S.SIRI JAGAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2010 / 23RD ASHADHA 1932
Con.Case(C).No. 526 of 2010(S)
-----------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.33861/2007 Dated 04/02/2010
PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER IN THE WPC:
DR.C.FRANCIS, S/O.P.CHELLAN, AGED 49 YEARS, LECTURER SELECTION GRADE, DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS, FATHIMA MATHA NATIONAL COLLEGE, KOLLAM, RESIDING AT T.C.14/1202, LEELA BHAVAN, ST.GEORGE LANE, KUMARAPURAM, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL
RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 1&2 IN THE WPC:
BY G.P.SRI.P.NARAYANAN
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THEFOLLOWING:
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.O.C. No. 526 of 2010
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 14th day of July, 2010
J U D G M E N T
This contempt case is filed alleging noncompliance with directions in Annexure II judgment. The direction in Annexure II judgment is as follows:
“5. I am of opinion that in view of the Division Bench decisions relied upon by the petitioner, respondents 1 and 2 cannot take the stand that they are not liable to pay salary. If they have any dispute regarding the validity of approval by the University, it is for them to take up the matter with the University or to challenge the approval granted by the University appropriately. But as long as the approval stands, the Government is bound to pay salary. The University has, on a reference by the Government, affirmed the validity of the approval. As such, it is for respondents 1 and 2 to challenge the approval appropriately. Therefore, without prejudice to that right, there would be a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to see that the petitioner is paid salary in the Selection Grade in accordance with the approval granted by the University. Arrears shall be paid within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the petitioner shall be continued to be paid salary in the Selection Grade every month until the approval is validly set aside or stayed in appropriate proceedings. Regarding the claim of the petitioner for two advance increments, the contention is left open for the petitioner to agitate in appropriate proceedings.”
view of the liberty given in the judgment itself, the State has filed W.P.(C) No.16660/2010, in which the approval of the
C.O.C. No. 526 of 2010
-2-
petitioner's placement has been stayed. In view of the same, this contempt case is closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to seek restoration of the same by filing a petition for the purpose, if ultimately that writ petition is dismissed.
S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE
shg/
Dr. C. Francis
Kuruvila John
Stella
S. Siri Jagan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
