Disposed

C.Premarajan v. Sri.M G Rajamanikiam

Kerala HC21 Jul 2017Con.Case(C)/794/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a contempt case alleging non-compliance of a prior direction regarding terminal benefits. The respondent claimed benefits were disbursed, while the petitioner sought leaving salary benefits. The court closed the contempt proceedings as directed benefits were allegedly met, leaving the specific claim for leave salary for a separate proceeding. The disposition alone does not meet the thresho

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed; no liability for contempt found as directed benefits were distributed.

C.Premarajan Vs Sri.M G Rajamanikiam — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2017/30TH ASHADHA, 1939

¶5

Con.Case(C).No. 794 of 2017 (S)

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 39708/2016 DATED 14-12-2016 --------------

¶7

PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN W.P.(C): ---------------------------------

¶8

C.PREMARAJAN, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. JANARDHANAN NAIR, KIZHAKKE THODIKKAYIL HOUSE, CHELANNUR P.O., KOZHIKODE - 673 616, (DRIVER, RETIRED ON 31.10.2016 FROM KOZHIKODE DEPOT)

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.K.P.JUSTINE (KARIPAT)

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN W.P.(C):

¶11

SRI.M G RAJAMANIKIAM, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 023.

¶12

BY ADV. SHRI.T.P SAJAN, SC

¶13

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-07-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

K.V

¶15

Con.Case(C).No. 794 of 2017 (S)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONERS ANNEXURES:

¶18

A1: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.12.2016 IN WPC NO 39708/2016.

¶19

A2: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.11.2016.

¶20

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES

¶21

A1: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ISSUED VIDE REF NO PA3 (PA7)/036781/16 DATED 114.2017.

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO JUDGE

K.V.

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶26

--------------------------------------------

¶27

Contempt Case (C).No.794 of 2017

¶28

--------------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 21^st day of July, 2017

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

This contempt case is instituted alleging non-

¶31

compliance of the direction issued by this Court in W.P.(C). No.39708/2016.

¶32

The learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation submits that the direction issued by this Court has been complied with and all the admitted terminal benefits payable to the petitioner have been disbursed.

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶34

however, submits that the leave salary benefits payable to

¶35

W.P.(c).No.794 of 2017

¶36

: 2 :

¶37

the petitioner have not been disbursed.

¶38

It is seen that the direction issued by this Court

¶39

is only that all the admitted terminal benefits payable to petitioner shall be disbursed.

¶40

In the said circumstances, the contempt case is closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings for realisation of the leave salary benefits, if any, payable.

¶41

Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE

¶42

rsr

C.Premarajan v. Sri.M G Rajamanikiam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Premarajan v. Sri.M G Rajamanikiam

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

India Tech Constructions Vs a.Shynamol

M/S Shiva Infraconstro Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Ministry of Railways

G.Sundaresan Vs State of Kerala

Manoj S.Viswam Vs M.G.Rajamanykyam

N.G.Lalu Vs Rajamanikyam

T.v.Abdul Salam Vs C.J.Paulson