In a contempt case to enforce directions under WP(C) No. 26212/2015, the court closed the proceeding on the respondent's submission that compliance had been made, allowing the petitioner liberty to challenge the order through proper proceedings.
Petitioner left liberty to challenge the order passed by the respondent through proper proceedings.
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
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 20TH MAGHA, 1939
Con.Case(C).No. 19 of 2018
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 26212/2015 DATED 21-02-2017.
PETITIONER/PETITIONER
M.R.PUSHPARAJAN, AGED 54 YEARS,S/O.RAGHAVAN.M.A,MANGALA MUNDACKAL, EDATHALA.P.O,ALUVA EAST VILLAGE,ERNAKULAM DIST.
BY ADVS.SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ SRI.VARUN C.VIJAY KUM.A.ARUNA
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT NO.1:
MOHAMMED.Y.SAFIRULLA K, FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, DISTRICT COLLECTOR,ERNAKULAM-682001.
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sdr/-
Con.Case(C).No. 19 of 2018
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE I THE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 03.09.2015
ANNEXURE II THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO. 26212/2015
RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES
NIL
/TRUE COPY/
sdr/- PA TO JUDGE
Devan Ramachandran, J.
======================
Cont.Case (C) No.19 of 2018 in W.P.(C) No.26212 of 2015
==========================
Dated this the 09th day of February, 2018 JUDGMENT
The learned Government Pleader submits that the
directions in the judgment in question has been complied with by the respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner concedes that he has received memo along with an order passed by the respondent and says that the petitioner may be
left liberty to challenge the orders, if he so advised.
Taking note of the above submission, I close this contempt case, recording the submission of the learned Government Pleader that orders have already been issued and leaving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order, if he is so advised in terms of law, through a proper proceedings.
Sd/-
Devan Ramachandran,
Judge
SB/09/02/2018
// true copy //
P.A to Judge
M.R. Pushparajan
Mohammed.Y. Safirulla K
Devan Ramachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
