V.P.Aliyamutty v. B.Mohammed Jamal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2015/31ST ASHADHA, 1937 Con.Case(C).No. 266 of 2015 (S) -------------------------------------------------- (AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO. 10177/2013 DATED 05-11-2014) ---------------- PETITIONER/PETITIONER :

----------------------------------------- V.P.ALIYAMUTTY, AGED 61 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMMED, RESIDING AT VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O.VADAKKUMPURAM, VALANCHERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN SRI.P.A.HARISH RESPONDENT/5TH RESPONDENT :

------------------------------------------------------ B.MOHAMMED JAMAL, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA STATE WAQF BOARD, VIP ROAD, KOCHI-682 310 BY ADV. SRI.K.SHIBILI NAHA THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

sts

COC.NO.266/2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

ANNEX A COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18/3/2014 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT ANNEX B COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ADMINISTRATOR STATE WAQF BOARD DATED 5/4/2014.

ANNEX C CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO.10177/2013 DATED 5/11/2014.

ANNEX D COPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER DATED 15/11/2014 ANNEX E COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19/1/2015.

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:

NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE sts

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

-------------------------------------------- Contempt Case (C). No. 266 of 2015 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2015

J U D G M E N T

Pursuant to judgment of this court in WP(C) No.10177/2013, proceedings have been initiated under Section 52(A) of the WAKF Act.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that misinterpreting the directions, the Authorised Officer filed a complaint before the Station Officer, Valanchery instead of filing before the Magistrate Court, Tirur. It is open for the Board to correct any mistake occurred in taking follow up actions. 3.

However, taking note of the fact that the directions of the judgment have been complied with, the Contempt Court Case is closed.

Sd/- A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.

Pn