A contempt case where the Government Pleader reported compliance with directions. The court dismissed a request to implead a new party, citing no scope in contempt proceedings, and closed the matter with liberty for review.
Contempt case closed with liberty to file review petition.
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 A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1940
Con.Case(C).No. 649 of 2018
(AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO. 15552/2011 DATED 23-10-2017)
PETITIONER/1ST PETITIONERS:
RACHEL ABRAHAM, AGED 55 YEARS, W/O.OOMMEN VARGHESE, THEVERIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKUMBHAGOM P.O., NIRANAM WEST, THIRUVALLA.
BY ADVS.SRI.CHERIAN GEE VARGHESE SRI.P.HARIDAS SRI.RENJI GEORGE CHERIAN SRI.P.C.SHIJIN SRI.R.B.BALACHANDRAN
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4:
1. SRI.A.SHAJAHAN IAS, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, PRESENTLY WORKING AS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. SRI.K.V.MOHANKUMAR I.A.S., AGE AND FATHER'S NAME IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, PRESENTLY WORKING AS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.
3. SRI.RAVISANKAR.S, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, PRESENTLY WORKING AS DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689 601.
4. SRI.USHADEVI.P., AGE AND FATHER'S NAME IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, PRESENTLY WORKING AS THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVALLA - 689 601.
R1 TO R4 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.S.GOPINATHAN
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06-04-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts/10/4/2018
Con.Case(C).No. 649 of 2018
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.15552/2011 DATED 12/10/2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO JUDGE
sts 10/4/2018
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J. ========================= Cont.Case (C).No.649/2018 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 6th day of April, 2018
J U D G M E N T
It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the directions have been complied with. However, on behalf of Adv.Chandrasekhar, a representation has been made before this Court that one of the aggrieved wants to get impleaded in the Contempt Case. This Court finds no scope for impleading in the Contempt Case. If any person feels aggrieved by the judgment, they are free to file a review petition. With liberty to file a review petition, the Contempt Case is closed.
Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE
ms
RACHEL ABRAHAM
SRI.A.SHAJAHAN IAS
SRI.K.V.MOHANKUMAR I.A.S.
SRI.RAVISANKAR.S
SRI.USHADEVI.P.
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
