Contempt case regarding an order granting retirement benefits contingent on a Non-liability Certificate, dismissed as merits lie outside contempt jurisdiction.
Contempt case closed; liberty to petitioner to approach other forums reserved.
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 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 17TH MAGHA, 1944
CON.CASE(C) NO. 78 OF 2023
(ARISING OUT OF JUDGMENT DATED 03.11.2022 IN WP(C) 35141/2022
PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT)
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WP(C):
K. SAJEEVAN, AGED 60 YEARS,
S/O. KUTTAPPAN, RESIDING AT LAKSHMI BHAVAN,
PUNNAPARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, KERALA – 688004.
BY ADVS.
NISHA GEORGE
REGINALD VALSALAN
GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.)
RESPONDENT/1ST RESPONDENT IN WP(C):
MR. DINESAN CHERUVAT,
(AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER),
MANAGING DIRECTOR, MATSYAFED,
(KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE FEDERATION FOR FISHERIES
DEVELOPMENT LTD., KAMALESHWARAM, MANAKKAD P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695009.
BY ADV T.P.PRADEEP, SC, MATSYAFED
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 06.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
CON.CASE(C) NO. 78 OF 2023
-2-
JUDGMENT
When this matter was called today, the
learned counsel for the respondent submitted
that an order has been issued, granting all
eligible retiral benefits to the petitioner;
however, that it will be disbursed to him, after
he produces necessary Non-liability Certificate.
2.Sri.Reginald Valsalan - learned counsel
for the petitioner, vehemently argued that new
order is contumacious, because it imposes a
condition which is impossible, even going by the
Statutory Scheme.
3.I am afraid that I cannot enter into the
merits of the afore rival contentions while
sitting in Contempt of Court jurisdiction; but
it will be upto the petitioner to deal with the
new order in any manner, that he may be advised.
I thus close this Contempt Case, with the
afore liberty being reserved to the petitioner;
CON.CASE(C) NO. 78 OF 2023
-3-
for which purpose, all contentions are left
open.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
akv
CON.CASE(C) NO. 78 OF 2023
-4-
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 78/2023
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE-A1CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
03.11.2022 IN W.P (C) NO. 35141 OF
2022 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT
ANNEXURE-A2TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD
BEARING THE DATE 28.11.2022 CONFIRMING
RECEIPT OF THE ANNEXURE-A1 JUDGMENT
K. SAJEEVAN
MR. DINESAN CHERUVAT
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court