IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 7TH ASWINA 1933 Cont.Case(C).No. 96 of 2011(S) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.21679/2008 Dated 25/03/2010 .................... PETITIONER: ----------- THERESIA D'COUTH, AGED 51 YEARS, W/O. FRANCIS SEMENTHY, SENIOR ACCOUNTANT, DISTRICT TREASURY, KANNUR. RESIDING AT LOVE DALE, MELLAMAY PARAMBIL, P.O.KADUKUTTY, VIA CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY SMT.SUMATHI DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV.SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SHRI. E.K.PRAKASH, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES, GOVT. OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. SMT. J.C.LEELA, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), JOINT DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES, GOVT. OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYANAN THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JJJ Cont.Case(C).No. 96 of 2011(S) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE: ANNEXURE A: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED IN WPC NO:21679/2008 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT ANNEXURE B: COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER FORWARDING THE ANNEXURE A JUDGMENT TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT ANNEXURE C: COPY OF THE LETTER ANNEXING ANNEXURE D REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT ANNEXURE D: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER THROUGH PROPER CHANNEL ANNEXURE E: COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER ANNEXINGTHE REMINDER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ANNEXURE F: COPY OF THE REMINDER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURE: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE JJJ Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Cont.Case(C).No.96 of 2011-S = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 29th day of September, 2011. Judgment It is submitted that the Division Bench has listed the appeal, W.A.No.365 of 2011, filed against the judgment, for disposal after condoning the delay in filing the appeal. Having regard to the law laid by the Apex Court, it would be inappropriate to now infer contumacious conduct of the non-compliance of the judgment, on the basis of which this case is filed. This case is hence closed, without prejudice to the petitioner applying for reviving or reopening of this case, based on the decision in the writ appeal, if it is so needed. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge. Sha/2909