S.Suresh v. Sri.Antony Chacko
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioners filed a contempt case for non-compliance with a prior order directing the KSRTC to regularize their services. The Court noted the KSRTC issued an order complying with the judgment, though it partially rejected claims. Holding that challenged compliance orders do not require special leave to contest and that the direction was complied with, the Court closed the contempt case.
What did the court decide?
The contempt of court case was closed as the judicial direction had been complied with.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/27TH PHALGUNA, 1936
Con.Case(C).No. 273 of 2015 (S) ----------------------------------JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 33268/2014 DATED 10-12-2014
PETITIONERS/PETITIONER IN THE WPC: ----------------------------------
1. S.SURESH, AGED 47 YEARS
- S/O.SREEDHARAN, EMPANELLED DRIVER, KSRTC
- THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CITY DEPOT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. S.ABOOBAKER SIDHIK, AGED 38 YEARS,
- S/O.SHAHUL HAMEED, EMPANELLED DRIVER, KSRTC
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the contempt of court proceedings should continue given the respondent Corporation had issued an order in compliance with the prior judgment.
Whether persons aggrieved by a compliance order require express permission to challenge it.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
S.Suresh
- petitioner
S.Aboobaker Sidhik
- petitioner
S.Venugopalan Nair
- respondent
Antony Chacko
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court