IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2010 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33019 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- RAHIM, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O. ABDULLA, NISSA MANZIL, PARAKUNNU P.O., NAVAYIKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM, PIN-691 001. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 001. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 33019 OF 2010 (B) ===================== Dated this the 29th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P8, an order passed by the 2nd respondent giving interim custody of the vehicle bearing Regn.No.KL-07/F-7261 to the petitioner. On an earlier occasion, the petitioner had approached this Court and by Ext.P7 judgment in WP(C) No.7480/10, the case was disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to pass final orders in the matter. The complaint of the petitioner is that though Ext.P7 judgment was rendered as early as on 9/3/2010, instead of passing final order as directed therein, only Ext.P8 order giving interim custody was passed. 2. If as stated by the petitioner, his compliant is regarding non compliance of the directions in Ext.P7 judgment, the remedy of the petitioner was to have moved under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act rather than filing a fresh writ petition. Therefore, that grievance of the petitioner cannot be examined in this writ petition. 3. Be that as it may, having regard to the fact that WPC No. 33019/10 :2 : subsequent to Ext.P7 judgment, the Act itself has been amended w.e.f. 14/6/2010 conferring power on the Sub Divisional Magistrate to pass orders, it is directed that it will be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of this judgment before the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned, who shall immediately thereupon take action and pass final orders in the matter. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp