Court dismissed the petitioner's request to proceed with a contempt case challenging a director's order, holding that merits must be challenged by writ, not contempt proceedings; matter closed with contents left open.
Contempt case closed; petitioner directed to challenge the order by filing a writ 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 DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 13TH BHADRA, 1945 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1664 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT WP(C) 32429/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
ANANDA BABU M.J, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O MADHAVAN PILLAI, P, CONDUCTOR GR.I (RETD.) KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, PALODE DEPOT AND RESIDING AT VIJAYA VILASOM, THRIKKOVIL VATTOM, BHARATHANOORP.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695609
BY ADV N.UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.2 IN WP(C):
SHRI. BIJU PRABHAKAR,S/O SHRI THACHADI PRABHAKARAN, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, WORKING AS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695023
SRI.DEEPU THANKAN[SC]
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1664 OF 2023
2
JUDGMENT
When this matter was called today, Sri.Deepu Thankan – learned Standing Counsel for the respondent, submitted that a statement has been filed by him, producing therewith the order issued by the respondent dated 07.08.2023, in full compliance with the directions of this Court.
In the afore circumstances, this Contempt of Court Case is closed; however, with full liberty reserved to the petitioner to assail or challenge the order now issued by the respondent in terms of law, for which purpose, all his contentions are left open.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE
lsn
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1664 OF 2023
3
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1664/2023
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 13.10.2022 IN W.P.(C) NO.32429/2022
Annexure 2 A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 21.10.2022 ISSUED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT
Annexure 3
A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 12.03.2023 ADDRESSED TO THE RESPONDENT BY THE COUNSEL TO THE PETITIONER THROUGH REGISTERED POST WITH A/D.
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE R-1 (a) A true copy of the order dated 07/08/2023, issued by the Chairman and Managing Director.
TRUE COPY
P.A TO JUDGE
LSN
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petition contesting the legality of the respondent's order can be treated as a contempt of court case and proceeded with before this Court.
Whether the Court can adjudicate on the merits of the impugned order while exercising its contempt jurisdiction.
ANANDA BABU M.J
SHRI. BIJU PRABHAKAR
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
