IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 964 of 2011(S) ------------------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.10537/2005 Dated 21/08/2008 .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ C.K.SUKUMARAN, AGED 90 YEARS, S/O.KUNCHU, PULICKAL THODY VEEDU, PERATTIL,OLLUR VILLAGE,CHIRAYNIKIZHI, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.RAMNATH SRI.P.RAJESH (KOTTAKKAL) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- D.K.GOEL,S/O.M.L.GOEL,AGED 53 YEARS, DEPUTY SECRETARY,FREEDOM FIGHTERS PENSION DIVISION,MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS,LOK NAYAK BHAVAN KHAN MARKET,NEW DELHI-110 003. ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss COC. NO.964/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES 11:- CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 21.8.2008 IN WPC. 10537/2005 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. A2:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 1.4.2009 ISSUED BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORNMATION OFFICER, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (FREEDOM FIGHTERS PENSION- A) DEPARTMENT ACCOMPANIED WITH THE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED FROM THE SAID DEPARTMENT DTD. 12.12.2008 (BY REGD. POST WITH A/D) BEARING 46364/FFPA1/2005/GAD TO THE SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS FF DIVISION, LOK NAYAK BHAVAN, KHAN MARKET NEW DELHI. A3:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 17.9.2009 ALONG WITH POSTAL REGISTRATION RECEIPT AFFIXED THERE UPON ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT. A4:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 8.12.2010 WITH THE POSTAL REGISTRATION RECEIPT AFFIXED THEREUPON ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT. A5:- COPY OF THE LETTER DT.D 13.2.1974 IN FILE 19/4112/73 /FF. VIII ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS PRODUCED IN THE WRIT PETITIN AS EXT.P2. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES R1:- COPY OF THE LETTER DT.D 1.11.2011. R1(a):- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 23.3.09. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss COC. NO.964/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== Contempt Case (C).No. 964 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 9th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T This contempt case is filed by the petitioner in W.P.(C).No. 10537/2005 complaining of non-compliance with the directions in that judgment . The directions in that judgment are as follows; “The 2nd respondent shall forward a recommendation regarding the eligibility of the petitioner for pension under the SSS Pension Scheme on the basis of the documents, true copies of which are produced along with the writ petition, particularly Exts.P35, P16, P17 and P18. Such recommendation shall be forwarded to the 1st respondent within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. On receipt of the same, the 1st respondent shall, within two months, pass final orders under the SSS Pension scheme. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition and all documents produced along with the same and subsequently, to the 2nd respondent along with a certified copy of this judgment for compliance.” 2. The petitioner's complaint is that the petitioner has not received any orders on his application for SSS pension. Originally the respondent filed an affidavit stating that Annexure R1(a) order has been passed as early as in March, 2009, and the same has been forwarded to the petitioner. On a scrutiny of Ext.R1(a) order, it is seen that Ext.R1(a) order was forwarded to one Sri.C.K.Sukumaran at Thalassery, whereas the petitioner is a resident of Chirayankizh in Thiruvananthapuram district. When this was pointed out to the respondent, the respondent took time to file an additional affidavit and affidavit dated 7.10.2011 was filed still taking the stand that the order c.o.c.964/11 - : 2 :- was served through the Government of Kerala as evidenced by Annexure R1 produced along with that affidavit. When it was pointed out that still the respondent has not satisfied this Court that they have taken appropriate steps to comply with the directions of this Court, an additional affidavit dated 1.11.2011 has been filed taking the stand that inadvertently the order was forwarded in a wrong address. Of course, insofar as the order has already been passed pursuant to the direction in Annexure A1 judgment, the petitioner has to certainly challenge the same appropriately. But because of the callous and negligent action of the respondent, the petitioner lost three precious years of his life. The petitioner is aged 90 years. He is running out of time and because of callous act of the respondent he has lost three years. In view of the callous and negligent way in which the respondent has treated the matter, I am inclined to direct the respondent to pay costs to the petitioner. Accordingly, I close this contempt case without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the order now passed appropriately. But the respondent shall pay costs of ` 15,000/- to the petitioner within one month from today. It would be open to the respondent to recover the said costs from the person(s) responsible for the mistake. However, the said costs shall not be debited to the exchequer. If the cost is not paid c.o.c.964/11 - : 3 :- within the time stipulated, it would be open to the petitioner to move this Court under the Contempt of Courts Act for non-compliance with the said direction. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge