IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2011 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 446 of 2011(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC NO.7422/2007 DATED 21/01/2007. .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER IN WP(C) -------------------------------------------------------- C.GOPINATHAN, S/O.RAMAKRISHAN GUPTAN, AGED 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHUNDEKKAD HOUSE, AZHIYANNUR P.O., KADAMBAZHIPURAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.JIBU P THOMAS SRI.P.S.APPU SRI.A.R.NIMOD SRI.C.A.ANOOP RESPONDENT(S): 1ST RESPONENT IN WP(C) ---------------------------------------------------------------- SRI.JAMES VARGHESE, (FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION(F) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. BY GOVERNMMENT PLEADER SHRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: krj ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ Contempt Case (C) NO.446 OF 2011 ========================= Dated this the 7th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein, Sri.C.Gopinathan, filed WP(C) No.7422/2007 challenging the appointment of the 4th respondent as Manager of Higher Secondary School, Katampazhipuram in Ottappalam. By judgment dated 21st of January, 2010, the writ petition was disposed of with the following directions:- Therefore, I set aside Ext.P6 and direct the 1st respondent to reconsider Ext.R4(a) application made by the 4th respondent with notice to the petitioner, 4th respondent and other children of C.Ramakrishna Guptan who are also parties to O.S.No.165/2005 now pending before the Sub Court, Ottappalam. Orders shall be passed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 2. In pursuance to the directions, Annexure B order dated 10/6/2010 was passed by the respondent. According to the petitioner, the order has been passed in violation of the directions in the judgment in as much as notice was not given to Sri.C.Chandramohanan, one of the sons of Sri.C.Ramakrishna Guptan. 3. However, in para 3 of Annexure B order passed by the respondent, it is stated thus: Shri.Gopinathan also informed that Shri.C.Chandra COC No. 446/11 :2 : mohanan another son of Late Ramakrishan Guptan did to get the notice and added that Shri.Chandramohanan also expressed his willingness to appoint C.Gopinathan as Manager of the school. 4. Sri.C.Gopinathan mentioned in the order is none other than the petitioner. There is no averment in this petition that the petitioner did not make a statement before the respondent as stated in Annexure B. If that be so, the petitioner having made the respondent act upon his statement, cannot in my view launch proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act against the respondent having acted upon his statement. For this reason, I am not inclined to entertain this petition. 5. However, I clarify that the findings in this judgment will not act to the prejudice of the petitioner in any proceedings that may have been initiated by him aggrieved by Annexure B order. Contempt petition is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp