Partly allowed

Dr.P.Pradeep v. Dr.Shivaji Chakravorti

Kerala HC5 Jan 2016Con.Case(C)/1235/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a contempt case for non-implementation of a court direction granting benefits. The Court held the contempt case could not be decided to determine eligibility, which requires a selection committee. The judgment was suo moto reviewed and recalled, and the contempt case was closed.

What did the court decide?

Judgment in WP(C) No.32047/2014 suo moto reviewed and recalled; Contempt Case No. 1235 of 2015 closed; Writ petition remapped to appropriate court.

Dr.P.Pradeep Vs Dr.Shivaji Chakravorti — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/15TH POUSHA, 1937 Con.Case(C).No. 1235 of 2015 (S) IN WP(C).32047/2014

¶5

JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 32047/2014 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 20.05.2015

¶6

PETITIONER/WRIT PETITIONER:

¶7

DR.P.PRADEEP, AGED 57 YEARS S/O.PADMABHAN, PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT NIT CAMPUS(P.O), KOZHIKODE, PIN:673601 KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.A.V.THOMAS SMT.M.M.JASMIN SRI.NIDHI SAM JOHNS

¶9

SRI.LIJO JOSEPH

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2:

¶11

1. DR.SHIVAJI CHAKRAVORTI, AGED 53 YEARS S/O.OF JAGABANDHU CHAKRABORTY, DIRECTOR NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT NIT CAMPUS(P.O), KOZHIKODE, PIN:673601 KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶12

2. DR.B.SUKUMAR, AGED 53 YEARS S/O S.B.PILLAI, REGISTRAR NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT NIT CAMPUS(P.O), KOZHIKODE, PIN-673601 KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶13

BY ADV.SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI

¶14

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

BKA/-

¶16

Con.Case(C).No. 1235 of 2015 (S) --------------------------------

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER'(S) EXHIBITS:

¶19

ANNEXURE - A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.05.2015 IN WP(C) NO.32047/2014 OF THIS COURT.

¶20

RESPONDENT'(S) EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE

bka/-

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶25

Cont. Case (C) No. 1235 of 2015

¶26

Dated this the 5^th day of January, 2016

¶27

J U D G M E N T

¶28

The contempt case arises out the judgment of this Court in WP(C) No.32047/2014 dated 20.05.2015.

¶29

This Court, based on the affidavit filed before this Court, disposed of the writ petition. In the operative portion of the judgment, it is ordered as follows;

¶30

“There shall be a direction to the respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner and grant such benefits without any delay at any rate within a period of one month.”

¶31

On account of the non-implementation of the same, the writ petitioner has come up before this Court with this contempt case.

¶32

In the writ petition, the respondents have already filed an IA for extension of time for implementation.

¶33

The petitioner's case is that the respondents are bound to implement the judgment without any delay and they have made willful disobedience in implementing the direction of this Court.

¶34

The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents would submit that though the petitioner is eligible, the

¶35

Cont. Case (C) No. 1235 of 2015

¶36

..2..

¶37

petitioner's eligibility has to be considered by the selection committee, which has to be constituted. For that, the petitioner has to apply and the petitioner's eligibility will be considered by the selection committee.

¶38

However, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is no necessity to apply for the benefit of HAG scale and also there is no necessity to constitute a selection committee.

¶39

Apparently, this Court is of the view that the matter

¶40

cannot be decided neither in the contempt proceedings nor in the application for extension of time for implementing the judgment. Since the matters have to be properly adjudicated, this Court is of the view that the judgment in WP(C) No.32047/2014 dated 20.05.2015 has to be reviewed. Accordingly, the judgment dated 20.05.2015 is suo moto reviewed and recalled.

¶41

In that view of the matter, the contempt case is closed. The Registry shall post WP(C) No.32047/2014 before the appropriate court.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE

¶44

bka/7.1.16

Dr.P.Pradeep v. Dr.Shivaji Chakravorti

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.P.Pradeep v. Dr.Shivaji Chakravorti

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

Rahamathulla N. Vs Brig.Anil Sharma

Rahu Subramanian Vs Sub Inspector of Police, Kunnathunadu

Sreejith M.R Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Joseph K.J Vs Dr.K.M.Abraham, I.A.S

Dr.S.Mothilal Nehru Vs P.v.Balachandran

S. Karunakaran Vs District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram