Disposed

Ashok Kumar P.S. v. Babu Sebastian, Vice Chancellor, M.G.University

Kerala HC19 Mar 2018Con.Case(C)/492/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a contempt case alleging non-compliance with its judgment in W.P.(C) No. 18632 of 2014. The respondent submitted that it had issued the compliance order and apologized for the delay. The Court closed the matter reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the compliance order.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings closed. Liberty reserved to petitioner to challenge the compliance order.

Ashok Kumar P.S. Vs Babu Sebastian, Vice Chancellor… — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1939 Con.Case(C).No. 492 of 2018

¶3

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 18632/2014 of THIS HON'BLE COURT . ---------

¶4

PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER ------------------------

¶5

ASHOK KUMAR P.S., AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.K.M.SIVARAMAN NAIR(LATE), SIVADAYA, NORTH GATE, ETTUMANOOR, KOTTAYAM

¶6

BY ADVS.SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU SRI.E.M.ABDUL KHADIR SRI.K.M.FAISAL (KALAMASSERY) SRI.P.U.VINOD KUMAR SRI.MITHUN BABY JOHN SMT.AMRIN FATHIMA SRI.RAHUL ROY

¶7

RESPONDENT(S)/2ND RESPONDENT IN THE WP(C):

¶8

BABU SEBASTIAN, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, (FATHER'S NAME AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), THE VICE CHANCELLOR AND CHAIRMAN OF THE SYNDICATE, MAHATHMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM,PIN-686560.

¶9

BY SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN

¶10

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-03-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

¶12

Con.Case(C).No. 492 of 2018

¶13

APPENDIX

¶14

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES

¶15

ANNEXURE A:- CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.2.2017 IN WPC.NO.18632 OF 2014 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶16

ANNEXURE B:- A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 09.2.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER THE RTI ACT ALONG WITH ITS FEE RECEIPT.

¶17

RESPONDENT(S)'ANNEXURES- NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PS TO JUDGE

20/03/2018

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.

¶23

- - - - Contempt Case (Civil) No. 492 of 2018

¶24

- - - - Dated this the 19^th day of March, 2018

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

This Contempt Case has been filed alleging that the judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No.18632 of 2014 has not been complied with by the respondent.

¶27

The learned Standing Counsel for the University, Sri.Ashok M. Cheriyan, who is appearing for the respondent herein submits that, contrary to the above allegations, the judgment in question has been complied with and that an order has been issued by the Vice Chancellor, on 17.03.2018. He further apologies for the respondent in not having acted within the time granted by this Court, but submits that since orders have now been issued, no action may be continued in this Contempt Case.

¶28

Smt. Vahida Babu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner takes umbrage to the manner in which the order has been now issued by the respondent-Vice Chancellor of the University and says that he seems to have exercised extraordinary powers, under Section 10(17) of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act, to issue this order, which according to her, is not proper or even permissible in law. She says that the factum of the order having been passed on

¶29

Contempt Case (Civil) No. 492 of 2018

¶30

-:2:-

¶31

17.03.2018 would itself bear as testimony to her contention that the order has been issued in hurry and in haste.

¶32

Even though I notice Smt.Vahida Babu's contention as above, I am of the view that since the respondent has passed the order, in obedience to the directions of this Court in W.P.(C) No.18632 of 2014, it would not be justified for this Court to go into the merits or the validity of the said order, since it could certainly be within the remedies available to the petitioner to challenge the said order in terms of the law.

¶33

In such view of the matter, I close this Contempt Case, recording the submission of Sri.Ashok M. Cheiryan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent that his client has already issued an order dated 17.03.2018, in terms of the judgment of this Court and reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the said order, if he is so advised.

¶34

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE

¶35

ttb/19.03

Ashok Kumar P.S. v. Babu Sebastian, Vice Chancellor, M.G.University

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar P.S. v. Babu Sebastian, Vice Chancellor, M.G.University

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

Vinod S. Vs Mr.Purushothaman

Kaipuzha Coconut Producer Company Ltd. Vs a. Hemachandran I.P.S

R.Vijayan Vs District Collector

V.Sreelatha Vs Smt.K.Valsala

Secretary, State Co-Operative Employees Pension Board Vs Geetha R.B.

P.G.Peethambaran Vs Idukki District Co-Operative Bank