Disposed

C.G.Chandramoopan v. Reguraman

Kerala HC4 Nov 2013Con.Case(C)/1123/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt of court case regarding the Wheeler's case judgment violating retirement benefits directions, the petitioner had some terminal benefits fully paid. The court accepted that since terminal benefits were paid and pay revision benefits lacked a specific time limit violation, no further orders were called for, and the case was closed.

What did the court decide?

The contempt case was closed without passing any further orders or penalty.

C.G.Chandramoopan Vs Reguraman — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/13TH KARTHIKA, 1935

¶5

Con.Case(C).No. 1123 of 2013 (S) -------------------------------(JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 28321/2012 DATED 05-02-2013)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

C.G.CHANDRAMOOPAN AGED 61 YEARS S/O.GOPADAN MOO[PAN, CHATHANATTU VELI, C.M.C 31 CHERTHALA P.O ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT (RETIRED SANITATION WORKER ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY)

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.L.RAJESH NARAYAN

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

REGURAMAN AGE NOT KNOWN FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN SECRETARY ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY, ALAPPUZHA 688 001

¶11

R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS, SC, M.C.,ALP

¶12

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-11-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

Con.Case(C).No. 1123 of 2013 (S)

¶14

APPENDIX

¶15

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶16

ANNEXURE A: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 5.1.2013 IN WP(C) NO.28321/2012.

¶17

ANNEXURE B: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 17.7.2013.

¶18

ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.2.2013.

¶19

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

¶20

R1: A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT RECEIVED FROM THE RESPONDENT MUNICIPALITY.

// TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE

Scl.

P.N. RAVINDRAN, J.

¶25

Cont. Case (C) No.1123 of 2013

¶26

Dated this the 4^th day of November, 2013

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

This contempt of court case is filed alleging that the respondent herein who is the Secretary of Alappuzha Municipality has wilfully disobeyed the direction issued by this Court in Annexure A judgment delivered on 5.2.2013 in W.P.(C) No.28321 of 2013.

¶29

When the contempt of court case came up for hearing on 27.9.2013, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that though a cheque for Rs.3,00,515/- was handed over, some more amounts are due and therefore the contempt case may be adjourned and the respondent may be directed to file a statement setting out the amount payable to the petitioner by way of terminal benefits. Thereupon, a statement dated 28.10.2013 has filed setting out the amounts payable to the petitioner under various heads. When the contempt of court case came up for further hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that except pay revision arrears and pension commutation consequent on pay revision, the other terminal benefits have been paid.

¶30

¶31

¶32

The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that this Court has not, in Annexure A judgment, directed payment of pay revision benefits within a time limit that it was only in the matter of payment of terminal benefits that a time limit has been fixed and that pay revision benefits will be paid in the order of seniority having regard to the date of retirement.

¶33

In such circumstances, as the terminal benefits have been paid in full and all that remains to paid is pay revision benefits and also the difference in the commuted value of pension, I am of the opinion that no further orders are called for in this contempt of court case. It is accordingly closed.

¶34

P.N. RAVINDRAN JUDGE

¶35

Scl.

C.G.Chandramoopan v. Reguraman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.G.Chandramoopan v. Reguraman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.G.Binu Vs Union Bank of India

Mukri Ibrayi Vs P. Muhammed Kunhi Musaliyar

Marykutty Thomas Vs the Cherthala Co-Operative Urban Bank LTD.NO.2655

M.H.Muhammed Kunju Vs Reghuraman

Mathai Mathew Vs Mathai Varkey Power of Attorney Holder

M.Manuvel Vs Malabar Gold Pvt.Ltd