IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2009 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Con.Case(C).No. 1409 of 2009(S) ---------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.19105/2009 DATED 07/08/2009 .................... PETITIONER/1ST PETITIONER IN WP(C) NO.19105/09 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- BABU, AGED 46, S/O. LAKSHMANAN, MADHURAPPALLIL, PRAYAR SOUTH, ALUMPEEDIKA. BY ADV. SMT.R.RANJINI RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.2 IN WPC ------------------------------------------------------------- S. SHAJAHAN, FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.I.V. PRAMOD. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/12/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... CONT.CASE.NO.1409 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioners were deprived of their livelihood by enforcement of a Fast Track Project. They came to this court saying that they are entitled to compensation for loss and also that they are entitled to restitution of their source of livelihood. Being a matter relatable to the life and livelihood of the petitioners, 33 in number, the District Collector, Kollam was directed to convene a meeting of all concerned and take appropriate action. The issue in hand could also be relatable to the concerns regarding human rights. Now the petitioners complain that nothing is heard after an initial meeting. Contradicting this, the learned Government Pleader submits, on instructions, that 30 among Coc 1409/09 2 the petitioners were present in the meeting and decision has been taken at district level to take up the matter with the State Government to find out ways and means of providing some relief to the petitioners. With this scenario, I deem it appropriate to do something positive rather than precipitate matters creating bottle necks for the reliefs that may be available. Recording the submission on behalf of the learned Government Pleader that there is no wilful neglect or disobedience in the matter, this contempt case is closed, enabling the parties including respondents to ensure that the final resolution comes through at the earliest. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/11/12