IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2010 / 4TH BHADRA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 258 of 2010(S) ------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.5544/2005 Dated 08/07/2009 .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONERS IN THE WPC ------------------------ 1. M.MATHAI, S/O. LATE POULOSE, AGED 61, RETIRED SUPERINTENDENT, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ANKAMALY, RESIDING AT MULLOLY HOUSE, VELLARAPPALLY SOUTH P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. K.N.NARAYANA PILLAI, S/O. LATE NARAYANA PILLAI AGED 60 YEARS, RETIRED SUPERINTENDENT, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, RESIDING AT KURUNGATTU HOUSE, KEEZHILLAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY MR.KRB.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE BY ADV. MR.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL RESPONDENT(S): 1ST RESPONDENT ----------------------------- SHRI. T.P.SENKUMAR, S/O. PRABHAKARAN THATHAMATH, AGED 52 YEARS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, RESIDING AT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss COC. NO.258/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES AI:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC. 5544/2005 DTD. 8.7.2009. A II:- COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO. PL7/017476/09 DTD 11.11.2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. AIII:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 22.12.2009 SENT BY THE PETITIONER'S COUNSEL TO THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES NIL:- TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Cont.Case(C).No.258 of 2010-S & I.A.No.417 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 26th day of August, 2011. Judgment 1.The captioned contempt of court case was closed by order dated 18.3.2010 recording the submission that the judgment has been complied with. The petitioners' right to seek reopening of the matter was preserved. 2.Going by the materials placed along with I.A.No.417 of 2010 and the affidavit and counter affidavit filed thereto, this case is reopened only to say that those materials are insufficient to hold that there is wilful neglect or default in complying with the directions in the judgment so as to initiate further action. 3.The materials, including averments in connection with I.A.No.417 of 2010, including counter affidavit, reply affidavit etc. clearly show that there is some dispute in so far as the COC258/10 -: 2 :- petitioners are concerned as regards the quantification of the total payables. The KSRTC authorities are firm in their view that the total outstandings have been calculated and disbursed. This generates a disputed issue of fact which can be adjudicated and decided upon only by going into the account and considering whether each amount fixed for payment was that which was legally due or whether such amount was lesser than the eligible amount. This exercise cannot be undertaken in exercise of authority under the Contempt of Courts Act. For the aforesaid reasons, this contempt of court case, which is reopened, is again closed finding that there is no situation for initiating further action. However, it is clarified that any right of the petitioners for remedy in accordance with law before any competent jurisdiction even on the basis of the findings in the judgment in WP(C). 5544 of 2005 will stand left open. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge. Sha/2708