Disposed

Pranav K.P. v. K.V. Pushpa (Pen 288558)

Kerala HC14 Oct 2022Con.Case(C)/992/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt case, the court closed the proceedings regarding alleged violation of a direction not to terminate petitioners from service. The court held that the legality of the respondent's notification could not be decided in contempt proceedings, reserving that issue for the underlying writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceeding closed; petitioner's contention regarding notification validity reserved for disposal of underlying writ petition.

Pranav K.P. Vs K.V. Pushpa (Pen 288558) — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 22ND ASWINA, 1944

¶5

CON.CASE(C) NO. 992 OF 2022

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTWP(C) 16668/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA PETITIONER/S:

¶7

1PRANAV K.P.
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O.VASU K.P., PRANAVAM HOUSE,
SOUTH THRIKKARIPPUR,
ELAMBACHI P.O., KASARAGODE DISTRICT, PIN - 671311
2VASANTHAKUMAR K.
AGED 37 YEARS
PALLANCHI HOUSE, MULLERIA VIA,
PANDI P.O., KASARAGODE DISTRICT, PIN - 671534

¶8

3SHOBHA V.
AGED 44 YEARS
W/O.DEVADAS,
KATTUKULANGARA, AJANUR,
ANANDASRAMAM (VIA),
KASARAGODE DISTRICT, PIN - 671531
4UNNIKRISHNAN C.M.
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O.MADHAVAN NAMBOODIRI,
CHEERAVALLI ILLOM, PUTHUR,
PILATHARA, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670504
5SREEJA K.
AGED 50 YEARS
KRISHNA NIVAS,
VALIYAPURAM PARAMBA,
EDAKKADU P.O., KANNUR-670663., PIN - 670663
BY ADV K.K.SAIDALAVI

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

K.V. PUSHPA (PEN 288558),
AGED 55 YEARS
(FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER),
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
CIVIL STATION, KASARAGODE, PIN - 671123

¶11

OTHER PRESENT:

¶12

CON.CASE(C) NO. 992 OF 2022

¶13

¶14

SRI. APPU P. S;GP

¶15

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 14.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

CON.CASE(C) NO. 992 OF 2022

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Dated this the 14^th day of October, 2022

¶20

This contempt of court case is filed alleging that the respondent has violated the direction in Annexure A1 order dated 23.05.2022, not to terminate the petitioners from service, if notification and interview for appointment to the post occupied by the petitioners was not conducted pursuant to Ext.P4.

¶21

2.The respondent has produced notification No.D2/8280 of 2021 dated 23.04.2022 to prove that the notification in terms of Ext.P4 had been published prior to the interim order.

¶22

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the notification is not issued in terms of Ext.P4.

¶23

Be that as it may, the fact remains that a notification had been issued. The legality or otherwise the notification cannot be decided in this contempt of court proceedings.

¶24

The contempt court case is hence closed, reserving the petitioner's right to agitate all contentions, including the validity and sanctity of the aforementioned notification, in W.P(C) No. 16668 of 2022.

Sd/-

V.G ARUN

JUDGE

CON.CASE(C) NO. 992 OF 2022

¶30

¶31

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 992/2022

¶32

`PETITIONER ANNEXUR`	`ES`
`Annexure-A1`	`ORIGINAL OF THE ORDER DATED 23-5-2022 IN W.P.` `(C)NO.16668/2022 ON THE FILE OF THIS HON'BLE` `COURT.`
`Annexure-A2`	`ORIGINAL OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 26-5-2022` `IN W.P.(C) 16668/2022 ON THE FILE OF THIS` `HON'BLE COURT.`
`Annexure-A3`	`TRUE COPY OF THE TERMINATION NOTICE ISSUED BY` `HEADMASTER (L/C), GOVT. SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND` `(ACADEMIC COORDINATOR FOR GOVT. SPECIAL` `TEACHERS TRAINING INSTITUTE, KASARAGOD).`
`Annexure-A4`	`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER` `NO.M1/201803/2020/D.G.E., DATED 23.2.2022` `DIRECTED THIS RESPONDENT, TO RELEASE THEIR` `SALARY IMMEDIATELY UPTO 30-5-2022`
`Annexure-A4(a)`	`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER` `NO.D2/8280/2021/D.D.E., DATED 25.2.2022, THIS` `RESPONDENT DIRECTED THE DEO KASARAGODE TO` `RELEASE THEIR SALARY UPTO MAY, 2022 WITH` `IMMEDIATE EFFECT.`

Pranav K.P. v. K.V. Pushpa (Pen 288558)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pranav K.P. v. K.V. Pushpa (Pen 288558)

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

T.A. Xavier Vs Nishant Kavungaparambil

The Executive Engineer,Lsgd Division ,Kakkanad Ernakulam Vs C v Radhakrishnan, S/O Viswanatha Pai Thuruthelveli,Maruthorvattom P O ,Cherthala

Hassan N.S Vs Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady

Sijo Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Thomson Thomas Vs District Collector

Annamma Joseph Vs State of Kerala