IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, 13TH MARCH, 2008/23RD PHALGUNA 1929 Con.Case(C).No. 314 of 2008(S) ------------------------------ (NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE ORDER IN WPC.27575/2006 Dated 02/01/2007 ) PETITIONER/9TH PETITIONER: -------------------------------------------- NITHIN.P.R., AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.P.S.RAJAN, "ASWATHY" , NORTH ARYAD P.O., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE ADV. SMT.P.V.PARVATHI ADV. SMT.REENA THOMAS ADV. SRI.L.RAM MOHAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------- SURESH JEEVAN.A.K., AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, SECRETARY, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHENCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN, SC, TDB THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------- Contempt of Court Case NO. 314 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th March, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.DATTU, C.J. The ninth petitioner in W.P.(C) No.27575 of 2006 is the complainant in this Contempt Petition filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act read with Article 215 of the Constitution. 2. In this Contempt Petition, petitioner alleges that the respondent has deliberately and wilfully disobeyed the interim orders and directions issued by this Court, in particular, the direction contained in paragraph 16 of the order. Therefore, requests this Court to initiate appropriate contempt proceedings against the respondent and punish him for his wilful and deliberate disobedience of the directions issued by this Court. 3. While entertaining this Contempt Petition, notice of the Contempt Petition was ordered to be issued and served on the respondent. The respondent has entered appearance through his learned counsel and has also filed a counter affidavit. We do not intend to traverse the statements made in the counter affidavit, since the learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits, may be after realising that the explanation offered by him in the counter affidavit may not be palatable to the Court, that the respondent may be granted three months' time to comply with the interim direction issued by this court in paragraph 16 of the said order. Contempt of Court Case (Civil) NO.314 of 2008 :: 2 :: 4. This Court in W.P.(C) No.27575 of 2006 by the interim order dated 2.1.2007 had issued the following direction to the respondent. The direction is as under: “We also direct that the steps in respect of the selection to the post of L.D.C./Group Officers including interview are to be completed and a rank list prepared.” 5. This order was passed on 2.1.2007. Though initially there was some impediment to the respondent to comply with the interim direction issued by this Court, now, in our opinion, there is no such impediment which would prevent him from complying with the interim direction issued by this Court. In the normal course, we should have taken appropriate proceedings against the respondent, but for the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent. 6. In that view of the matter, without going into the other details of the case, we pass the following: O R D E R i) The Contempt Petition is disposed of; ii) The statement of the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent would comply with the interim direction issued by this Court at paragraph 16 of the order dated 2.1.2007, within three months is placed on record; iii) The respondent shall not seek for any further extension of time; iv) If, for any reason, the respondent fails to comply with the undertaking given by him before this Court, the complainant is at liberty to approach this Court once over again. Contempt of Court Case (Civil) NO.314 of 2008 :: 3 :: 7. W.P.(C) Nos.26692 of 2006, 27575 of 2007, 22384 of 2006 and 32966 of 2006 are posted before us only because the Contempt Petition No.314 of 2008 was pending before us. Now that we have disposed of the Contempt Petition, there is no impediment in posting the Writ Petitions for hearing before the regular Bench having the roster. Accordingly, we re-transmit the papers to the regular Bench. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) Chief Justice (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/DK