Court closed a contempt petition arising from a judgment in WP(C).26700/2013. No further proceedings were warranted due to compliance with prior directions.
Contempt case closed; liberty to petitioner to challenge the order in appropriate proceedings.
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 C.K.ABDUL REHIM
THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/21ST PHALGUNA, 1936
Con.Case(C).No. 140 of 2015 (S) IN WP(C).26700/2013
WP(C) 26700/2013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:
DEEPAK .U.NAIR, AGED 40 YEARS S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, DRIVER, KSRTC PIRAVOM, NEDIYATHAPPILLIL HOUSE, MULAKULAM SOUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686610.
BY ADV. SRI.DEEPAK U NAIR
RESPONDENT(S)/CONTEMNOR:
K.M.SREEKUMAR, AGED 49 YEARS FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN MANAGER ACCOUNTS IN CHARGE OF ECXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (VIGILANCE) KSRTC, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695001.
BY SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SC, KSRTC
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Con.Case(C).No. 140 of 2015 (S) IN WP(C).26700/2013
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A:COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).26700/2013 DATED, 23.1.2014
ANNEXURE B:COPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN TO THE CONTEMNOR DATED 11.7.2014
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
--------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
SKV
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.
===================
Cont. Case (C).No. 140 OF 2015
=======================
Dated this the 12th day of March, 2015
JUDGMENT
Standing counsel appearing for the respondent had produced copy of an order issued by the respondent through which the disciplinary action initiated against the petitioner was finalised by imposing punishment.
in the judgment reported as above, this court is of the opinion that no further proceedings in this Contempt of Court Case is warranted. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to challenge the order in appropriate proceedings to the extent he is aggrieved.
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE
SKV
DEEPAK .U.NAIR
K.M.SREEKUMAR
C.K.ABDUL REHIM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
