This is a contempt case where the petitioner alleged non-compliance of directives in WP(C) No. 35400/2015 dated 20.06.2016. The respondents submitted that an order had already been passed on 3.9.2016 and communicated to the petitioner.
Contempt case closed with liberty to petitioner to challenge the order of compliance.
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 SHAJI P. CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/8TH ASWINA, 1938
Con.Case(C).No. 1461 of 2016 (S) IN WP(C).35400/2015
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 35400/2015 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 20-06-2016
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONERS :
1. ALI.P
2. JOHNSON
3. NOUSHAD AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. ABU, ORAVATHODI HOUSE, ERAVIMANGALAM P.O., PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
4. NARAYANAN
5. ABOOBACKER
6. RATHEESH
AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. MANI, KUSALA HOUSE, KUNNAPPALLY P.O., PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
7. MOHAMMED ANEES
AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMED MUSTHAFA, PULIKKAL HOUSE, PONNIYAKURSSI P.O., PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
8. CHAMI AGED 48 YEARS, S/O. KUNHAN, KIZHISSERY HOUSE, KAKKOOTH, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
Con.Case(C).No. 1461 of 2016 (S) IN WP(C).35400/2015
9. MAMMAD AGED 57 YEARS, S/O. MOIDU, KOLOTHOD HOUSE, KUNNAPPALLY P.O., PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
10. MOHAMMED JASHEEN M. AGED 28 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMED ALI, MADALA HOUSE, KUNNAPPALLI P.O., PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
11. JAMES P.J.
AGED 41 YEARS, PUNNAMMOOTTIL HOUSE, NEAR VALLUVANAD VIDYA MANDIR, ERAVIMANGALAM P.O., PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
12. MOHAMMED SHAFEEQ P. AGED 26 YEARS, PALASSERY HOUSE, KUNNAPPALLI P.O., PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
13. NASEEL M.P.
AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. ALIPPU, MADAYIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KUNNAPPALLI P.O., PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.G.HARIHARAN
SRI.PRAVEEN.H. SMT.A.ANJANA SMT.K.S.SMITHA PRAVEEN SMT.T.T.SHANIBA
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2:
1. MR. SAHADEVAN
JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 322.
2. MR. SHAJI
SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM-679 322.
R BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.K ARAVIND KUMAR BABU
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Con.Case(C).No. 1461 of 2016 (S) IN WP(C).35400/2015
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE I: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT MADE IN W.P.(C) No.35400/2015 DATED 20.06.2016
ANNEXURE II: TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 30.06.2016 SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
ANNEXURE III: TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 30.06.2016 SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
sab
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
COC No.1461 of 2016
Dated this the 30th day of September, 2016
JUDGMENT
This contempt case is filed by the petitioner, complaining that, the directives contained in the judgment dated 20.6.2016 is not complied with by the respondents.
to the petitioner on 9.9.2016.
Therefore, I do not find any reason to pursue the contempt proceedings any further. Leaving open the liberty of the petitioner if he is aggrieved and advised so to challenge the order, this contempt case is closed.
Sd/- SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE
smv 30.09.2016
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to continue contempt proceedings where it is submitted that an order had been passed complying the judgment.
1. Ali.P to 13. Naseel M.P.
1. Mr. Sahadevan
2. Mr. Shaji
Shaji P. Chaly
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
