IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2008 / 2ND ASHADHA 1930 Con. Case(C).No. 745 of 2008 (S) -------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.29915/2007 Dated 21/01/2008 ...................................................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER ------------------------------ MR.S.MANILAL, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.K.SREEDHARAN, MULLACKAL GARDENS, T.V.PURAM P.O., VAIKOM. BY ADV. SRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN RESPONDENT/1ST RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------- MRS.DR.SHARMILA MARY JOSEPH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, D/O.JOSEPH, DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SMT. K.R. DEEPA THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== Cont. Case (C) NO. 745 OF 2008 - S ====================== Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner complains that respondent has disobeyed Annexure A1 to A3 judgments in the matter of conducting an enquiry under Section 65 of the Revenue Recovery Act. According to the petitioner, enquiry into the means of the petitioner has not been held as directed by this court. 2. I heard the learned Government Pleader, who has instructions in the matter. It is submitted that on 3 occasions viz. 13/3/2008, 26/3/2008 and 8/5/2008, petitioner was afforded opportunity of hearing and that it is thereafter that Annexure A6 was issued. Going by the steps taken by the respondents resulting in Annexure A6, I do not find any deliberate disobedience of the judgments rendering the respondent liable to be proceeded against. If the petitioner is aggrieved, petitioner may challenge Annexure A6 on merits. Contempt of court case is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp