P.J Mathew v. Smt.Kamala Vardhana Rao,Ias
Case brief
What is this about?
In this contempt proceeding filed due to alleged non-compliance of previous directions to fix pension benefits, the respondents filed an affidavit submitting that promotion orders and government orders complying with the earlier judgments had been passed. The court accepted the explanation and closed the petition.
What did the court decide?
The contempt petition is closed as no wilful contempt has been made out.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2015/15TH ASHADHA, 193
Con.Case(C).No. 1231 of 2014 (S)
-------------------------------------------------(AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA.NO. 2761/2007 DATED 22-05-2014) (AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP.NO. 14936/2002 DATED 09-03-2007) -----------------
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
P.J. MATHEW, SON OF JOSEPH, AGED 66 YEARS, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT (RETIRED), REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT (RESIDING AT PONNEDUTHA KALLAL, P.O.ONNUKAL,(VIA) KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.)
BY ADVS.SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.M.SAJJAD
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS:
1. SRI. KAMALA VARDHANA RAO, IAS AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondents have committed wilful contempt by failing to comply with court directions regarding pension fixation.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to arrears of pension after promotion.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
P.J. Mathew
- respondent
Kamala Vardhana Rao
- respondent
M.C. Mohan Das
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court