IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2011 / 21ST SRAVANA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 44 of 2011(S) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.16644/2010 Dated 14/10/2010 .................... PETITIONER/1ST PETITIONER -------------------------- BIJI EAPEN, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. LATE EAPEN ENCHAKALODY, PRESIDENT, IATA AGENTS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA (IAAI), C/O. SPEEDWINGS TRAVEL & CARGO (P) LTD., SREEKANDATH ROAD, RAVIPURAM, COCHIN-682 016. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAVINDRAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SMT.APARNA RAJAN RESPONDENS: 2NDRESPONDENT ------------------------- 1. DR. NASIM ZAIDI, AGED 58 YEARS, (FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN), SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF CIVIL AVIATION, HELD THE POST OF DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION TILL 30.11.10, RAJIV GANDHI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110003. 2. E.K.BHARAT BHUSHAN, AGED 55 YEARS, (FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN), DIRECTOR GENERAL OF VICIL AVIATION, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL AVIATION, TECHNICAL CENTRE, OPP. SAFDARJUNG AIRPORT, NEW DELHI-110003 SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA FOR R1&2 SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/08/2011, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 16644 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Con.Case(C).No. 44 of 2011(S) APPENDIX --------------- PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES --------------------------------------- A-A:- CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.16644/2010 DT.14.10.10 A-B:- TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER LETTER DT.17.12.10 A-C:- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DGCA DT.5.3.10 A-D:- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT.23.7.10 TO THE DIECTOR SOUTH ASIA A-D(a):- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT.2.8.10 TO THE GENERAL MANAGER BRITISH AIRWAYS A-D(b):- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT.21.7.10 TO THE GENERAL MANAGER SINGAPORE AIRLINES A-E:- TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IA.662/11 DT.NIL A-F:- TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DT.NIL A-G:- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. 662/11 IN WP16644/10 DT.25.2.11 A-H:- TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT & PETITION DT.NIL A-J:- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT.12.8.10 A-K:- TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO A-J DT.27.8.10 A-L:- TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE MINISTRY OF LAW AND JSUTICE DEPT. OF LEGAL AFFARIS DT.24.12.09 1ST RESPPONDENT'S ANNEXURES --------------------------------------------------- A R1:- TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DT.18.3.11 A R2:- TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL OPINION DT.25.4.11 2ND RESPPONDENT'S ANNEXURES --------------------------------------------------- A R1:- TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DT.18.3.11 A R2:- TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL OPINION DT.25.4.11 PA TO JUDGE TRUE COPY ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------- Cont.Case (C) No.44 of 2011 in WP(C) No. 16644 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT This petition had been filed under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, alleging that the respondents have willfully disobeyed the directions of this Court in the judgment in WP(C) No.16644/2010 rendered on 14th October, 2010. 2. By the aforesaid judgment this Court directed the 2nd respondent herein to take necessary action on Ext.P7(a) and P8 representations within two months from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. 3. It is seen that copy of the judgment was delivered to the respondents on 1.11.2010. After the expiry of period, specified for passing orders, respondents filed I.A.No.662/11 seeking extension of time by two months which was allowed by this Court. That period expired on 1.4.2011 and thereupon Cont.Case (C) No.44 of 2011in WP(C) No. 16644 of 2010 2 I.A.No.6846/11 was filed seeking a further period of two months. This request was allowed by order dated 24.5.2011. It was in the meanwhile that this petition was filed. 4. On 30.6.2011, notice was issued to the respondents. During the pendency of the proceedings, in compliance with the judgment, order dated 28.7.2011 has been passed by the 2nd respondent and the petitioner has filed WP(C) No.21908/11 challenging the said order and the writ petition has been admitted by this Court. In the meanwhile, the respondents also sought condonation of delay in passing the orders by filing I.A No.12532/11 in WP(C) No.16644/2010. 5. Even in the absence of any order in the last mentioned I.A., fact remains that time extended by this Court twice and order dated 28.7.2011 has been passed in the purported compliance with the directions of this Court. Even for getting the delay condoned, the respondents have filed I.A.No. 12532/11 also. In such circumstances, I am unable to find that the conduct of the respondents demonstrate a case of willfull disobedience of Cont.Case (C) No.44 of 2011in WP(C) No. 16644 of 2010 3 the directions of this Court warranting proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act . Therefore the Contempt of Court Case will stand dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. rkc