IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2010 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 150 of 2010(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.21713/2009 Dated 15/09/2009 .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER IN THE WPC ------------------------------------ M.T.JOSEPH, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O. M.T.THOMAS, MAKKOLLIL HOUSE, PUTHUKULANGARA P.O., NEDUMANGAD. BY ADV. SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 AND 3 IN THE WPC --------------------------------------------- 1. K.E.PRAKASH, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES, POWER HOUSE ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SANAL KUMAR, ((AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, DISTRICT TREASURY, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKKATH FOR R1, 2 THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cont.Case (Civil) No. 150 of 2010 in W.P. (C) No. 21713 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T Alleging non-compliance with the directions in the judgment in WP(C) No.21713/09 this contempt case has been filed. As per the judgment dated 15.9.2009, the respondent was directed to complete the disciplinary enquiry initiated against the petitioner as per Ext.P4(b) within 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of the said judgment. A further direction was given to re-instate the petitioner in service in case the enquiry has not been completed as directed. When this matter was taken up for admission, the learned Government Pleader made available a copy of the notice issued to the petitioner on 17.3.2010. It would reveal that the proceedings initiated against the petitioner as per Ext.P4(b) has been completed and a report has been submitted by the disciplinary authority. Pursuant to the receipt of the said report, from the enquiry officer, notice has been given to the petitioner proposing the punishment of dismissal from CCCNo.150 of 2010 : 2 : service. A copy of the enquiry report was also furnished to the petitioner along with the notice. In short, it is evident from the said notice that directions issued as per judgment dated 15.9.2009 has been complied with and the disciplinary proceedings have been completed and what remains to be done is only passing of the final orders pursuant to this disciplinary proceedings. The respondents would be able to pass orders only after getting explanation from the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid aspects, this contempt case is closed. It is made clear that this will not stand in the way of the petitioner challenging the order, if any, passed by the respondents in the disciplinary proceedings. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A. To Judge