IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2010 / 3RD ASHADHA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 1274 of 2009(S) ------------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.22988/2007 Dated 02/04/2009 .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- C.G.ZACHARIAH, CHENNANKARA, EDATHUA P.O., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.JOMY GEORGE SRI.M.J.BENNY SRI.SEBASTIAN THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- K.V.MURALEEDHARAN, FATHER'S NAME AND AGED NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER WORKING AS DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND ALSO ACTING AS PUNJA SPECIAL OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- Cont. Case (C) No.1274 of 2009-S ---------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T This Contempt of Court Case has been filed, alleging wilful disobedience of the direction given by this Court vide Annexure 1 judgment dated 2.4.2009 in W.P.(C) No.22988 of 2007. Case of the petitioner is that, in spite of the clear direction given by this Court to finalise the matter after hearing the petitioner, no notice whatsoever was issued and Annexure A2 order was passed on 2.7.2009, which is nothing but an instance of contumacious act and hence sought to be pressed further. 2. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 21.5.2010; the contents of the affidavit dated 6.4.2010 filed by the contemnor were found as not satisfactory. In the said circumstances, this Court directed the learned Government Pleader to make available the original of register, if any, to show the acceptance of the notice by the petitioner and also the original of the proceedings as to the hearing held on 2.7.2009, establishing the presence of the petitioner and other parties concerned. Pursuant to the above order, an additional affidavit was filed by the contemnor, explaining the sequence of events, also expressing Cont. Case (C) No.1274 of 2009-S 2 ‘unconditional apology’ for the unintentional lapses. It was conceded that Anenxure 2 was not in conformity with the direction given by this Court vide Annexure 1. 3. In the additional affidavit, it was stated that, Annexure R1(a) notice dated ‘6.5.2009’ was actually sent to the petitioner on ‘11.5.2009’. On going through the original of the said notice produced before this Court, it was noted that eventhough the notice was dated 6.5.2009, it was actually ‘signed’ by the contemnor only on ‘12.5.2009’, whereas the entry made in the ‘despatch register’ was on the previous day ie. on 11.5.2009 (which was also produced before this Court for perusal). In the said circumstances, on confronting with the actual position as above, the respondent/contemnor sought for some more time to file a supplementary affidavit and accordingly, the matter was adjourned to 28.5.2010, further adjourned to 8.6.2010. 4. Today, the learned Government Pleader submits that Annexure A2 order has been re-called vide order No.A4.36/01 dated 15.6.2010, passed by the concerned officer, who is now holding the post of ‘Puncha Special Officer’, Alappuzha. A copy of the said order has been produced before this Court by the learned Government Pleader. It is stated in the said order that, the parties will be given further opportunity before passing fresh order. In the said circumstances, the proceedings are permitted to be taken to the logical conclusion, in tune with the Cont. Case (C) No.1274 of 2009-S 3 direction given in Annexure A1 judgment. Taking note of the fact that it is rather difficult to finalise the proceedings during the rainy season, the concerned authority is granted a further period of three months from today. 5. In view of the unconditional apology expressed by the Contemnor as to the contents of the affidavit, which actually did not reconcile with the actual facts and figures and also in view of the subsequent turn of events re-calling Annexure A2 order, this Court does not find it necessary to proceed with further steps in the contempt matter, but for deprecating the course pursued by the contemnor in the strongest possible words. Accordingly, further proceedings are dropped, however directing the contemnor to pay the cost of Rs.5,000/- to the petitioner within one month. It is made clear that the cost ordered shall be borne by the Contemnor himself. The Contempt of Court Case is closed. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab