The Court held that the contempt proceeding was unnecessary as the Government Pleader submitted that the Court's previous directions were complied with. No specific relief was granted, though the petitioner's remedy was left open.
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
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/2ND KARTHIKA, 1938
Con.Case(C).No. 1490 of 2016 (S)
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C).NO. 23068/2016, DATED 11-07-2016
NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER :
SANEESH A.S.,
AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. SADANANDAN, AMMUPPILLY HOUSE, YORDHANAPURAM PO, ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON
NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS.:
1. SRI. MUHAMMED Y.SAFEERULLA, IAS, DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM CHAIRMAN, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM-682 030 (NAME OF FATHER AND AGE IS NOT NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER).
2. SRI M. SADIQ ALI, SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM-682 030, (NAME AND FATHER AND AGE IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER.)
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Con.Case(C).No. 1490 of 2016 (S)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE A1: JUDGMENT IN W.P(C).NO. 23068/2016 DATED 11.07.2016.
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE
Msd.
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
Contempt Case No.1490 of 2016
----------------------------------Dated this the 24th day of October, 2016
J U D G M E N T
This contempt is filed complaining that the directives issued by this Court in the writ petition dated 11.7.2016 is not complied with. Today, when the matter is taken up, learned Government Pleader submitted that, the directions are complied with on 17.08.2016. Therefore, I do not find any reason to pursue the contempt proceedings any further. If the petitioner is aggrieved the remedy available to the petitioner is left open.
SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.
rmm/24/10/2016
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pursue contempt proceedings after the respondent government pleader reports compliance of court directions.
Saneesh A.S.
Muhammed Y.Safeerulla
M. Sadiq Ali
Shaji P. Chaly
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
