IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 10TH JULY 2009 / 19TH ASHADHA 1931 Con.Case(C).No. 651 of 2009(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.4232/2005 Dated 07/05/2005 .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. JOSE P.KALLOOPARAMBIL, AGED 53, S/O.PHILIPH, DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY, ST.MICHAEL'S COLLEGE, CHERTHALA. 2. P.N.VISHNURADHAN, AGED 53, S/O.NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI, LECTURER SENIOR GRADE DO. DO. 3. K.N.NEELAKANTAN NAMBOOTHIRI, AGED 51, S/O.NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI, LECTURER SELECTION GRADE, DEPARTMENT OF HINDI, DO. DO. 4. T.J.JAMESKUTTY, AGED 51, DEPT. OF PHYSICS, S/O.JOSEPH, LECTURER SEL. GRADE, DO. DO. 5. P.A.VARGHESE, AGED 51, S/O.ABRAHAM, LECTURER SEL. GRADE, DO. DO. 6. RAJU XAVIER, AGED 47, S/O.THOMAS, WORKING AS PRINCIPAL, DO. DO. 7. MARGET ISSAC, AGED 54, D/O.ISSAC, LECTURER SEL. GRADE, DEPT. OF ZOOLOGY, DO. DO. 8. PIOUS MATHAI, AGED 53, S/O.K.M.KUNKUKUNJU, LECTURER SEL. GRADE, DO. DO. 9. ANNIE JOSE K., AGED 47, D/O.JOSEPH KOYIPARAMBIL, LECTURER, SENIOR GRADE, DO. DO. 10. SHEELA MADONA M., AGED 53, D/O.GEORGE MATHEW, LECTURER SEL. GRADE, DEPT. OF ENGLISH, DO. DO. 11. A.B.JOHN JOSEPH, AGED 48, S/O.AUGUSTINE BENCHAMINE, LECTURER SEL. GRADE, DEPT OF ECONOMICS, DO. DO. 12. RIJU GREGORY, AGED 36, S/O.GREGORY K., LECTURER SENIOR GRADE, DO. DO. 13. V.MATHEW, AGED 37, S/O.VARGHESE, LECTURER SENIOR GRADE, DEPT. OF ENGLISH, DO. DO. 14. CHERIAN J.KATTOZHAM, AGED 52, S/O.JACOB JOSEPH, LECTURER SEL. GRADE, DEPT. OF CHEMISTRY, DO. DO. 15. K.G.THADEVOOSE, AGED 34, S/O.K.A.GEORGE, LECTURER SENIOR GRADE, DEPT. OF ENGLISH, DO. DO. 16. ANGELLA JOAN THOMAS, AGED 48, D/O.A.S.THOMAS, LECTURER SENIOR GRADE, DEPT. OF ENGLISH, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.J.OM PRAKASH RESPONDENT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT ----------------------------- PARIMALAM, WORKING AS DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, ERNAKUAM, (THE AGE AND NAME OF THE FATHER OF THE RESPONDENT ARE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS AND HENCE THE SAME ARE NOT FURNISHED HERE). BY G.P. SHRI A.J. VARGHESE THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.O.(C) No. 651 of 2009-S - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10th day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioners are aggrieved by the stand taken by the respondents in Annexure C communication issued to the Principal. By the said communication, the Principal was informed that the bill in respect of payment of salary for the month of May, 2009 was submitted not in accordance with the proceedings dated 21.6.2008. Accordingly, the Principal is directed to resubmit the bills strictly in accordance with the proceedings dated 21.6.2008. 2. It is mainly contended by the petitioners that Annexure C violates the directions issued in Annexures A and B judgments of this court, which has to be examined in detail. It is true that in Annexure A judgment this court in para 5, had issued various directions in the matter. When the respondent insisted for further compliance of certain formalities, the petitioners had approached this court by filing C.C.C.No.878/2008 which was disposed of by Annexure B judgment. The proceedings dated 21.6.2008 was made available before the court during the hearing of the said CCC. The said matter was disposed of recording the submission of the COC 651/2009 2 learned Govt. Pleader that bills will be honoured as directed by this court. True that the petitioners were given an opportunity to approach this court if they are aggrieved by the non-implementation of Annexure A judgment. This court made it clear that they are also free to challenge the order dated 21.6.2008. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the communication Annexure C clearly violates the directions issued in annexures A and B judgments. A reading of Annexure C shows that it is issued relying on the proceedings dated 21.6.2008. The petitioners were given liberty to challenge the same by Annexure B judgment itself. Annexure C itself is a fresh proceedings in the mater. Therefore, the remedy of the petitioners , if they are aggrieved by these two orders, is to file a fresh writ petition only or to approach the higher authorities in the matter. Reserving the right to challenge the same, the C.C.C. is closed. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/