IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2009 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Con.Case(C).No. 857 of 2009(S) ---------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.12267/2009 Dated 19/06/2009 .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ DR.JULARANI.P., W/O.ANISH LAL, AGED 38 YEARS, LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF RACHANA SAREERA, GOVERNMENT AYURVEDA COLLEGE, TRIPUNITHURA. BY ADV. MR.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ SMT.USHA TITUS, (FATHER'S NAME & AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.T.B.REMANI THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/11/2009, ALONG WITH COC NO. 860 OF 2009 THE COURT ON 04/12/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.O.(C) Nos.857 & 860 of 2009-S - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of December, 2009. JUDGMENT In these two Contempt of Court Cases, the petitioners are alleging disobedience of the interim order passed in the respective cases. 2. The respondent has filed separate affidavits in the matter. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Govt. Pleader appearing for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that as per the interim order Annexure A1, this Court directed the respondent to consider the case of provisional promotion of the petitioners in the concerned department, especially in the light of Ext.P8 Govt. Order. The representations submitted by the petitioners have been rejected as per Annexures A10 and A9 orders respectively which is in gross violation of the directions issued by this Court. 4. It is explained by the respondent in the affidavit that after passing of Ext.P8 order, the Departmental Promotion Committee met on 2.3.2009 and deferred the preparation of the select list for the post of Senior Lecturer in the respective department and hence, as on the date of passing of the interim order, the D.P.C. had already referred the matter to the P.S.C. for COC Nos.857 & 860/2009 2 clarification. It is explained that Annexures A10 and A9 orders have been passed strictly in compliance with the directions of this court to examine the case of the petitioners for promotion. This Court had only directed the respondent to consider the case of the petitioners for provisional promotion within the period prescribed in the interim order. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the prayer in the interlocutory application is to direct the first respondent to promote the petitioner. It is clear from the interim order that it is ordered as prayed for. Therefore, automatically the petitioners ought to have been promoted. 6. I am afraid, the said contention cannot be accepted. The direction has to be understood in the light of the operative portion of the interim order. The direction was to the effect that the first respondent will consider the case of promotion of the petitioners, especially in the light of Ext.P8 Govt. Order, in the concerned department. In that view of the matter, it cannot be said that there is a willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court. This is so, especially in the light of the various aspects pointed out in the affidavit filed by the respondent. Therefore, I am not satisfied that these are fit cases for taking action under the Contempt of Courts Act and accordingly they are dismissed. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) COC Nos.857 & 860/2009 3 kav/