IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2009 / 19TH POUSHA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 1572 of 2008(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.4937/2008 Dated 15/02/2008 .................... PETITIONER --------------- VELLOORKONAM POWRA SAMITHI VELOORKONAM, NAVAIKULAM PO., TRIVANDRUM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.V.SREEDHARAN, 68 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, LIJI NIVAS, VELLOORKONAM NAVIKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF SRI.A.MUHAMMED HASHIM RESPONDENT: 2ND RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------------------- ANANTHAKRISHNAN, 50 YEARS, TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, O/O.THE STATE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, PRANCE TOWER VAZHUTHACAUD, TRIVANDRUM-695014. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Cont. Case NO: 1572 OF 2008 S ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th January, 2009. JUDGMENT BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J. Writ petitioner is a Powra Samithi. It filed Annexure A1 representation before the Transport Commissioner, Trivandrum requesting to take action against unauthorised operation of tempo, tracker, minibus etc in Navaikulam Grama Panchayat. This Court, by Annexure A2 judgment directed the Transport Commissioner to consider Ext.P2 representation in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. Alleging that no action is taken pursuant to Annexure A2 and unauthorised operation is continuing, the petitioner caused to issue a lawyer notice on the Transport Commissioner. Copy of the said notice is produced as Annexure A3. Thereafter, this contempt of court case is filed alleging that the respondent has violated the direction of this Court. 2. Second respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that all possible action has been taken to curb the operation of parallel services. The same is evident from Annexures R3 to 14, it is submitted. The counter affidavit has been filed on 17.11.2008. Cont. Case 1572/2008 2 So far the petitioner has not filed any reply affidavit. So, we accept the submissions of the respondent regarding the action taken by him to prevent unauthorised operation of vehicles. Accordingly contempt of court case is closed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: