In a contempt proceeding, the Court held that directives from a prior judgment had been belatedly complied with. The contempt case was therefore closed, leaving the petitioner liberty to challenge the compliance order if advised.
The contempt case is closed.
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 SHAJI P.CHALY
TUESDAY ,THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1940 Con.Case(C).No. 332 of 2019 IN WP(C). 28953/2018
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 28953/2018 of HIGHCOURT
PETITIONER/S:
NAVAS AGED 39 YEARS S/O ABDUL SAMAD, KARANAPARAMBIL HOUSE, 16/163, CHERPU WEST, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 561
BY ADV. SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN
RESPONDENT/S:
DR.M.C REJIL, AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER.
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE RDO, IRINGALAKUDA 680 121
SMT.B VINITHA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER.
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Con.Case(C).No. 332 of 2019
2
JUDGMENT
This contempt case is filed by the petitioner complaining that the directives contained in the judgment dated 29.10.2018 is not complied with. Today when the matter is taken up, learned Government Pleader has produced an order dated 31.1.2019, from where I am satisfied that directives are complied with, though belatedly. Therefore, I do not find any reason to pursue the contempt case any further.
The contempt case is closed accordingly, leaving open the liberty of the petitioner to challenge the same, if aggrieved and advised so.
Sd/
SHAJI P.CHALY JUDGE
Jm/
Con.Case(C).No. 332 of 2019
3
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 01-03-2017 UNDER CLAUSE 6(2) OF THE KERALA LAND UTILIZATION ORDER.
ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.(C) NO.11055/2017.
ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08.11.2017 IN W.P.(C) NO.11055 OF 2017.
ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B1-5410/2018 DATED 12-9-2018 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE F CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29-102018 IN W.P.(C) NO.28953/2018.
NAVAS
DR.M.C REJIL
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
SMT.B VINITHA
SHAJI P C HALY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
