Dismissed

Easwari v. v.K.Vijayan

Kerala HC22 Aug 2014Con.Case(C)/457/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed contempt proceedings filed for alleged non-compliance with an earlier order fixing a petitioner's pension. Holding that the Pension Board had considered the directions, the Court dropped the proceedings allowing the petitioner to challenge the resulting orders.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings dropped; liberty granted to challenge orders of the Pension Board.

Easwari Vs v.K.Vijayan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/27TH JYAISHTA, 1936

¶5

Con.Case(C).No. 457 of 2014 (S)

¶6

------------------------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO. 20422/2010 DATED 09-07-2013.

¶7

PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WP(C).NO.20422/2010:

¶8

EASWARI, ACCOUNTANT (RETIRED), PALLURUTHY MANDALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.65, PALLURUTHY, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.IV/760, NORTH CHERLAI, ERNAKULAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB.

¶10

RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT IN WP(C).NO. 20422/2010:

¶11

V.K. VIJAYAN, S/O.KARAPPAN, AGED 52 YEARS, SECRETARY, KERALA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES EMPLOYEES PENSION BOARD, T.C. NO.27/156, 157, KALA NIWAS, CHINMAYA LANE, KUNNUMPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.K.R.SUNIL, SC.

¶13

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

rs.

¶15

Con.Case(C).No. 457 of 2014 (S)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:-

¶18

ANNEXURE I COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO. 20422/2010 DATED 09/07/2013. ANNEXURE II COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 03/08/2013 ISSUED BY THE PALLURUTHY MANDALAM SCB LTD. NO.65 TO THE PETITIONER.

¶19

ANNEXURE III COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21/10/2013 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PALLURUTHY MANDALAM SCB LTD. NO.65.

¶20

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J

*** * * * * * * * * * * * *** Cont.Case No.457 of 2014

¶26

Dated this the 22^nd day of August 2014

¶27

J U D G M E N T

¶28

This contempt proceedings are filed contending that pension has not been fixed in accordance with the directions issued by this Court in the judgment dated 09/07/2013 in W.P.C.No.20422/2010.

¶29

Apparently, the direction was to grant pension to the petitioner taking into consideration her qualifying service from 1987 onwards and orders have been passed by the Pension Board, taking into account the said fact as well. Under such circumstances, I do not think that the respondents have committed any wilful contempt.

¶30

Accordingly, the contempt proceedings are dropped with liberty to the petitioner to challenge any orders passed by the respondents in pursuance of this judgment before appropriate forum.

¶31

(sd/-)

¶32

(A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE)

¶33

jsr

¶34

W.P.C.No. 2

Easwari v. v.K.Vijayan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Easwari v. v.K.Vijayan

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

Balasubramanian Vs the Taluk Land Board

K.G. Antony Vs State of Kerala

Usha Breco Limited Vs the Commissioner of Land Revenue

Noushad Ali Vs M.P.Ajithkumar

N. Janardhanan Nair Vs Sri. Bharath Bhooshan E.K

Jaisy Philip Vs Sumanan N. Menon