Disposed

Yousaf C.T. v. Mr. Asharaf Ali

Kerala HC7 Feb 2023Con.Case(C)/14/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt case alleging violation of a direction forbidding appointments from a published Rank List, the Court held that factual disputes regarding the publication date of the list cannot be decided in contempt proceedings without apt evidence by the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's request for action under the Contempt of Courts Act was declined; petitioner directed to approach Registrar of Co-operative Societies.

Yousaf C.T. Vs Mr. Asharaf Ali — Kerala HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 18TH MAGHA, 1944

¶5

CON.CASE(C) NO. 14 OF 2023

¶6

[JUDGMENT DATED 07.12.2022 IN WP(C)No.38645/2022]

¶7

PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

¶8

YOUSAF C.T., AGED 34 YEARS,
S/O. HASSAN, CHETTIYARTHODI HOUSE, KURUVATTOOR,
VALLAPPUZHA P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT – 679336.

¶9

BY ADV C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 5 AND 6 IN WP(C):

¶11

1 MR. ASHARAF ALI, S/O. SRAJU, SECRETARY, VALLAPPUZHA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. F1207, NELLAYA P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN – 679335.

¶12

2 MR. K.MOHAMMED ASHARAF, S/O. MOHAMMEDKUTTY, PRESIDENT, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS/MANAGING COMMITTEE, VALLAPPUZHA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. F1207, NELLAYA P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN – 679335.

¶13

(AGE OF THE RESPONDENTS IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER)

¶14

BY ADVS.P.N.MOHANAN
C.P.SABARI
AMRUTHA SURESH
GILROY ROZARIO

¶15

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 07.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶16

CON.CASE(C) NO. 14 OF 2023

¶17

-2-

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

This Contempt Case has been filed by the

¶20

petitioner alleging that, in spite of the

¶21

specific directions in the judgment - that no
appointment should be made from the Rank
List, permitted to be published by the
respondent, for a period of one week
thereafter - said Authority has now made
appointments in its flagrant violation.

¶22

2.Sri.P.N.Mohanan – learned counsel for
the respondents, on the contrary, submitted

¶23

that the Rank List was published on
14.12.2022, by putting it up on the Notice
Boards of all the branches of the Society;
and that appointments were made only on
26.12.2022. He thus argued that there is no
violation of the directions in the judgment.

¶24

3.Sri.C.M.Mohammed Iquabal – learned

¶25

CON.CASE(C) NO. 14 OF 2023

¶26

counsel for the petitioner, on the other
hand, submitted that the assertion of the
respondents, that the Rank List was published
on 14.12.2022, is a self serving one without
any document in substantiation. He,
therefore, prayed that further action under
the Contempt of Courts Act be proceeded
against them.

¶27

4.I am afraid that I cannot accede to

¶28

the afore request of Sri.C.M.Mohammed
Iquabal, because the question whether the
Rank List was published on the Notice Board
of the branches of the Society is not an
issue which can be decided by this Court
while it acts under this jurisdiction. This
is a question of fact, which will have to be
established by the petitioner appositely.

¶29

5.That said, this Court has already

¶30

CON.CASE(C) NO. 14 OF 2023

¶31

-4-

¶32

disposed of another writ petition filed by
the petitioner, namely W.P.(C)No.85/2023,
allowing him to approach the Registrar of
Co-operative Societies with a representation
against the selection processes undertaken by
the Society. Obviously, therefore, the
petitioner will also be at liberty to impel
the allegations made in this Contempt Case,
which the said Authority will consider, along

¶33

with the exercise as ordered in the said writ
petition.

¶34

At this time, Sri.C.M.Mohammed Iquabal
intervened to request that the Registrar be
also directed to examine the CCTV visuals of
the branches of the Society. Again, this is

¶35

not a request that I can accede to; but if

¶36

the petitioner is to make such before the
Registrar in terms of the judgment in

¶37

CON.CASE(C) NO. 14 OF 2023

¶38

W.P.(C)No.85/2023, said Authority will

¶39

consider the same and take necessary action,
as may be warranted.

¶40

This Contempt Case is thus closed.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶43

JUDGE

¶44

akv

¶45

CON.CASE(C) NO. 14 OF 2023

¶46

-6-

¶47

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 14/2023

¶48

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶49

ANNEXURE A1THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN
W.P.(C).NO. 38645/2022 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT DATED 30.11.2022.
ANNEXURE A2THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
W.P.(C).NO.38645/2022 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT DATED 07.12.2022.
ANNEXURE A3THE TRUE COPY OF RELAVENT PAGES OF THE
RANKED LIST PUBLISHED BY THE
VALLAPPUZHA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
DATED 14.12.2022.

Yousaf C.T. v. Mr. Asharaf Ali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yousaf C.T. v. Mr. Asharaf Ali

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

Sheeba Vs K.S. Souda

Lalu C.M Vs v. Vigneshwari I.A.S

K. Sajeevan Vs Mr. Dinesan Cheruvat

Yousaf C.T. Vs State of Kerala

Jotun India Private Limited Vs Mv Penna Suraksha (Imo No. 9310599)

Naveena P.K. Vs Biju Prabhakar IAS