Dismissed

Transport Pensioners Friend, Represented by Secretary, K. Asokakumar, v. Biju Prabhakar IAS

Kerala HC25 May 2023Con.Case(C)/689/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt case regarding compliance with earlier directions, the Court closed the proceedings after the Government filed a Memo with its Order. The Court reserved liberty for the petitioner to challenge the legality of that Order in appropriate proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed with liberty reserved to petitioner to challenge the Government Order appropriately.

Transport Pensioners Friend, Represented by Secretary, K… — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2023 / 4TH JYAISHTA, 1945
CON.CASE(C) NO. 689 OF 2023

¶5

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.36042/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

TRANSPORT PENSIONERS FRIEND,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, K. ASOKAKUMAR,
AGED 66 YEARS, S/O.P K KUTTAN,
R/O.KURUPPANTAZHIKOM HOUSE, VAKKOM P.O.,
TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695308

¶8

BY ADVS.
E.ADITHYAN
JOSE ABRAHAM

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1BIJU PRABHAKAR IAS
AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT,
STATE OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001

¶11

2 V.P.JOY

¶12

AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 695001
BY ADV ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

SRI.SANTHOSH KUMAR-GP

¶15

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 25.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶16

CON.CASE(C) NO.689/2023 2

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The learned Special Government Pleader – Sri.Santhosh Kumar submitted that a Memo dated 19.05.2023 has been filed, producing therewith the Order of the Government dated 16.05.2023. He thus prayed that this Contempt Case be closed because the directions in the judgment have been fully complied with.

¶19

Sri.E.Adithyan – learned counsel for the petitioner in response, submitted that, though the Government has issued the afore order, it is illegal and unlawful; and therefore, prayed liberty for his client to challenge it appropriately.

¶20

In the afore circumstances, this Contempt Case is closed, with the afore requested liberty being reserved to the petitioner; for which purpose all contentions are left open.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶23

JUDGE

¶24

MC/25.5

¶25

CON.CASE(C) NO.689/2023 3

¶26

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 689/2023

¶27

PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure1CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)
36042 OF 2022 DATED 10-11-2022

Transport Pensioners Friend, Represented by Secretary, K. Asokakumar, v. Biju Prabhakar IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Transport Pensioners Friend, Represented by Secretary, K. Asokakumar, v. Biju Prabhakar IAS

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

Dr Joseph Michael Vs Ishita Roy IAS

Rosily M D Vs Anupaman C a

Vettikkavala Rural Co-Operative Society LTD.NO.Q1431. Vs the Kerala Co-Operative Ombudsman

Jiby Antony Vs State of Kerala

Ottur Service Co-Op.Bank Vs Tahsildar, Varkala

M.M.Sajeevan Vs Vellanikkara Service Co-Op.Bank LTD.NO.545