In a contempt case against the University of Calicut regarding a prior writ petition, the court recorded that the petitioner submitted compliance with the order. Consequently, the court closed the contempt proceedings without further adjudication.
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 K.VINOD CHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/2ND KARTHIKA, 1938
Con.Case(C).No. 1247 of 2016 (S)
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C).NO. 17847/2015, DATED 18-03-2016
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER IN WPC :
N.S.RAMAKRISHNAN,
AGE-55, S/O. SHANKARANARAYANA IYER, SECTION OFFICER (HIGHER GRADE), PRO-VICE CHANCELLOR'S OFFICE, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT P.O., THENJIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM
RESPONDENT(S)/1ST RESPONDENT IN WPC :
1. DR. T.A. ABDUL MAJEED, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O, THENJIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 635.
2. DR. K.M.MOHAMMED BASHEER, (AGE AND FAHTER'S NAME IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O, THENJIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 635
BY ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW, S.C
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Msd.
Con.Case(C).No. 1247 of 2016 (S)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE A: A COPY OF THE FILE NO. 24405/AD-E-ASST, OBTAINED UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. ANNEXURE B: A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C).NO. 17847/2015 DATED 18.03.2016. ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT APPEAL NO. 948/2016.
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE
Msd.
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
Contempt Case (Civil) No. 1247 of 2016 (S)
Dated: 24th October, 2016
J U D G M E N T
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that
the order is complied.
Recording the said submission, the contempt case is closed. The petitioner is left to challenge the
order if it causes any prejudice to him.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE
//True Copy//
P.A. to Judge
jjj 24/10/16
N.S. Ramakrishnan
Dr. T.A. Abdul Majeed
Dr. K.M. Mohammed Basheer
Vinod Chandraan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
