IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2008 / 11TH ASWINA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 379 of 2008(S) ------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.35618/2007 Dated 19/12/2007 ................................................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER: ------------------------------- M.D.ANTONY, S/O.DEVASSIA, AGED 34 YEARS, MATTAPPILLIL, T.V.PURAM P.O., VAIKOM. BY ADV. SRI.P. DEEPAK RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: --------------------------------- SRI.M.N.SUKUMARAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SMT. T.B. REMANI THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = C.O.C. No. 379 OF 2008 S = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 3rd day of October 2008 J U D G M E N T Disobedience of the direction in the judgment in W.P.(C) No. 35618/07, is complained of by the petitioner. 2. The writ petition was disposed of, on the basis that the timing has been settled in the conference held on 4.7.2007 and that necessary endorsements should be effected by the respondent. However, it is now pointed out by the learned Govt. Pleader that the timing settled on 4.7.2007, was without taking note of the rider in the grant that the variation will be without curtailment of the existing trips. It is stated that when the mistake was reported to the respondent, he had convened a fresh timing conference, but however, as the petitioner did not co-operate, the matter could not be finalised. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner denies of having received any such notice as asserted by the learned Govt. Pleader, I feel that if a mistake has been committed on 4.7.2007, C.O.C. No. 379 OF 2008 -2- that should certainly be corrected. 3. Therefore, I do not think that this case deserves proceedings against the respondent under the Contempt of Court Act. On the other hand what is required is that the respondent shall convene a fresh timing conference with notice to the petitioner and settle the timings, in pursuance to the order passed by the STAT and the RTA. 4. Contempt of Court Case is closed. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the respondent, who shall take steps for early completion of the proceedings. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-