IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2010 / 15TH SRAVANA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 875 of 2010(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.2961/2009 .................... PETITIONER: --------------- DR.SUJA ANI.G., D/O.LATE K.V.GEORGE, AGED 47 YEARS, PROFESSOR OF ORTHODONTICS, DENTAL COLLEGE, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR SMT.HENA BAHULEYAN RESPONDENT: --------------- MRS USHA TITUS I.A.S., AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, D/O.(FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), SECRETARY TO GOVERNENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K. RAMESH. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N. RAVINDRAN , J. = = = = = = = = = = = CON. CASE (C) 875 OF 2010 = = = = = = = = == = DATED THIS, THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2010. J U D G M E N T This contempt of court case is filed alleging that by promoting the petitioner as Professor in Orthodontics and transferring her to Dental College, Kottayam, the Under Secretary to Government has violated Annexure V interim order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 2961/2009 on 18.2.2010, whereby this Court declined to vacate the ad interim order passed in the writ petition, on 24.2.2009. 2. The contention raised in this case is that in view of Annexure IV order, the petitioner ought to have been retained at the Dental College, Thiruvananthapuram. In my opinion, the said contention is without any merit. By the interim order passed in W.P.(C) 2961/2009, this Court only directed the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue as Associate Professor in Orthodontics in the Dental College, Thiruvananthapuram. This Court did not, by the interim order passed in the said writ petition, restrain the respondents from transferring the petitioner on promotion. The petitioner has now been transferred pursuant to an order promoting her as Professor on a regular basis. In CON.C. 875/2010 2 such circumstances, it cannot be said that the respondents have acted in willful disobedience of Annexure V interim order of tis Court. I therefore, find no grounds to entertain this contempt case. It is accordingly, closed. P.N. RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) KNC/-