S.Chandrasekharan Potti v. Balachandran

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/15TH KARTHIKA, 1937 Con.Case(C).No. 224 of 2014 (S) IN WP(C).28982/2013 ----------------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 28982/2013 DATED 26-11-2013 PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER IN WPC :

----------------------------------------- S.CHANDRASEKHARAN POTTI, AGED 51 YEARS S/O. SEETHARAMAN POTTI, SANTHI THRIKKULANGARA DEVASWOM, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD VELLAYANI SUB GROUP, RESIDING AT RAM NIVAS VENGANOOR STREET, PALLICHAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS.SRI.D.KISHORE SMT.MINI GOPINATH RESPONDENT(S)/1ST RESPONDENT IN THE WPC :

-------------------------------------------------------- BALACHANDRAN (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) SECRETARY, THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY NANDANCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

BY ADV. SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU, SC, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE I:TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.11.2013 IN W.P.(C). 28982 OF 2013 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

========================== C.O.(C) No.224 OF 2014 ========================== Dated this the 6th day of November, 2015

JUDGMENT

The captioned contempt case has been filed alleging wilful disobedience with the directions of this Court in judgment dated 26.11.2013 in W.P.(C).No.28982 of 2013. As per the said judgment, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider Ext.P7 appeal and pass appropriate orders thereon. Ext.P7 is an appeal preferred by the petitioner who was a Santhi in Thrikkulangara Devaswom under the Travancore Devaswom Board against Ext.P6 order of transfer.

2.The respondent has filed a counter affidavit. Along with the same, Annexure R1(a) order dated 28.2.2014 has been produced. A

perusal of the same would reveal that it is an order passed by the respondent on Ext.P7 appeal which was directed to be disposed of as per judgment dated 26.11.2013. True that there is some delay in the matter of its disposal. However, considering the fact that Ext.P7 appeal has already been disposed of, I am of the view that it could not be said that the respondent has committed any wilful disobedience with the directions in the aforesaid judgment. In such circumstances, this contempt case is closed. It is made clear that in case the petitioner is having any grievance with respect to order dated 28.2.2014, it will be open to him to take up the matter appropriately, before appropriate forum.

Sd/- C.T. RAVIKUMAR (JUDGE) spc/

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

JUDGMENT

September, 2010