IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 6TH MARCH 2008 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1929 Con.Case(C).No. 1347 of 2004(S) ------------------------------------------------------------ ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER IN WPC.19783/2004 Dated 06/07/2004 .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER:- ------------------------------------- SABEER.N., S/O.IMBICHI MOITHI, AGED 26, RESIDING AT NIDUNGANDI HOUSE, P.O.NADUVANNUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 2 & 3:- ------------------------------------------------------ 1. SMT.K.SAUMINI, (DELETED) AGE & FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, A.E.O'S OFFICE, PERAMBRA. (RESPONDENT NO.1 IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AS PER ORDER DATED 11-12-2007 IN COC 1347/04) 2. SRI.BALAKRISHNAN, AGE & FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, MANAGER, KOTTOOR A.U.P.SCHOOL, KOTTOOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH THIS CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Cont.Case (Civil) No.1347 of 2004-S ------------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 6th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. One Sabeer who was the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.19783 of 2004 has presented this contempt case with a request to initiate appropriate contempt proceedings against the respondent and punish him for the so called wilful and deliberate disobedience of the interim orders passed by this Court dated 6th July, 2004. (2). In the writ petition the interim relief that was asked by the petitioner is as under: “ For the reasons stated in the writ petition, it is most respectfully prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to issue an interim direction directing the 3rd respondent Manager not to engage any other person in the school to the existing post of Hindi Teacher dehors Ext.P2 order, pending final disposal of the writ petition.” (3). The writ petition was presented by the petitioner only on 4th July 2004. (4. This Court while issuing notice to the respondents has granted an interim order which reads as under: “ Notice by Speed Post. There will be an interim relief as prayed for.” COC 1347/2004 -2- (5). The petitioner in this contempt petition alleges that one Smt.Laya. is appointed as Hindi Teacher after the interim order was passed by this Court. (6). While entertaining this contempt petition, we had issued notice to the respondent. (7). The respondent has entered appearance through his learned counsel and has filed counter affidavit resisting the reliefs sought for in the contempt case. Along with the counter affidavit, he has also produced Ext.R2 (b) order passed by the Assistant Educational Officer, Perambra dated 22-12-2003. In the said proceedings there is a clear mention of appointment of Smt. Laya by the Manager of Kottoor A.U.P.School as probationary Hindi Teacher with effect from 10-11-2003. (8). The learned counsel for the contesting respondent also submits that after the interim order was passed by this Court, no fresh appointment for the post of Hindi Teacher is made by the School. (9). As we have already indicated there is an interim order passed by this Court directing the 3rd respondent/Manager of the School not to post any other person in the School as Hindi teacher. (10). The proceedings of the Assistant Educational Officer would clearly demonstrate that the appointment of Smt.Laya was much prior to the interim order. There is no other material produced by the petitioner before us suggesting further appointment made by the manager of the School to the post of Hindi Teacher. In the absence of any materials we cannot say that the respondent has disobeyed the orders and directions COC 1347/2004 -3- issued by this Court. In that view of the matter, we do not intend to take cognizance of this contempt case filed by the petitioner/complainant. Accordingly, the contempt case is closed without prejudice to the contentions of both the parties. (11). In view of the order passed in the contempt petition, all pending interlocutory applications are closed. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE MS