High Court of KeralaCon.Case(C)/1002/2015closed

K.P.Mohanan v. Shri.M.Shahul Hameed

2015-08-21Honourable Mr. Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2015/30TH SRAVANA, 1937H Con.Case(C).No. 1002 of 2015 (S) IN WP(C).22742/2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 22742/2014 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 13.10.2014 PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS:

1. K.P.MOHANAN, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O PAPPACHAN, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL) ELECTRICAL SECTION, K.S.E.B. LIMITED OTTASEKHARAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

2. D.LAILADAS, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O DASAYYAN, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL) ELECTRICAL SECTION, K.S.E.B. LIMITED, ARYANAD-695 542 THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

3. V.G.GOPAN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O LATE GOPALAKRISHNA CHETTIAR, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL), 110 K.V. SUB STATION, K.S.E.B. LIMITED, PARATHIPPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

4. J.PRADEEP KUMAR, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O LATE JAMES, SUB ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL), 110 K.V. SUB STATION, K.S.E.B. LIMITED, ARUVIKKARA (P.O), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

5. V.S.SANTHOSH KUMAR, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O LATE K.SREEDHARAN, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL), GENERATION CIRCLE STORE, K.S.E.B. LIMITED, MOOLAMATTOM, IDUKKI.

BY ADVS.SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J.

SRI.K.R.GANESH RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 IN WPC:

1. SHRI.M.SHAHUL HAMEED, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VAIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.

2. SHRI .C.V.NANDAN, (AGE & FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), CHIEF ENGINEER (H.R.M.) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VAIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.

R BY SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

---------------------------------- Cont. Case (C) No.1002 of 2015 (S) in W.P. (C) No.22742 of 2014 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of August, 2015.

JUDGMENT

Both the learned counsel have reported that the directions in the judgment dated 13.10.2014 in W.P.(C) No. 22742 of 2014 have been complied with.

Recording the said submission of the respective counsel for the petitioners and also the respondents, this Court closes the Contempt Case as having not survived for consideration. sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE.

/True Copy/ P.A to Judge.