Disposal of a contempt of court case alleging non-compliance with a previous direction, by closing the case without prejudice to the petitioner's right to challenge the compliance order in appropriate proceedings.
Closed contempt of court case without prejudice to the petitioner's right to challenge the concerned order in appropriate 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
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
FRIDAY,THE 04TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 14TH POUSHA, 1940 Con.Case(C).No. 2365 of 2018 IN WP(C). 29008/2018
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 29008/2018 of HIGH COURT
PETITIONER:
M.G. RAKESH, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O M.T.GOPI, PUMP OPERATOR, KSRTC,PERUMBAVOOR DEPOT, PERUMBAVOOR,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.RAJEEVAN
RESPONDENT:
TOMIN J. THACHANKARY IPS (AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER),MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN,FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-PIN 695 023.
SRI T.P. SAJAN, STANDING COUNSEL, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION.
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Con.Case(C).No. 2365 of 2018
-2-
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed this contempt of court case alleging non-compliance of the direction contained in Annexure A1 judgment of this Court dated 04.09.2018 in W.P.(C) No.29008 of 2018, whereby that writ petition was disposed of by directing the respondent herein to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 representation dated 14.05.2018 made by the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioner and after affording him an opportunity of being heard, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of that judgment. In the judgment, it was made clear that this Court has not expressed anything as to the merits of the claim made by the petitioner in Ext.P3 and it is for the respondent to take an appropriate decision, strictly in accordance with law.
Con.Case(C).No. 2365 of 2018
-3-
consideration, it is submitted by the learned counsel on both sides that the respondent has already passed an order dated 22.12.2018, in terms of the direction contained in Annexure A1 judgment of this Court.
Recording the above submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this contempt of court case is closed, reserving the aforesaid right of the petitioner.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE
bpr
Con.Case(C).No. 2365 of 2018
-4-
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.29008/2018 DATED 4.9.2018
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
M.G. RAKESH
TOMIN J. THACHANKARY
ANIL K.NARENDARAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
