IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 18TH MAGHA 1929 Con.Case(C).No. 1052 of 2007(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN 33160./2006 Dated 03/01/2007 .................... PETITIONER/1ST PETITIONER IN WP(C): ----------------------------------------------------- AMBIKA, D/O. ARAMUKHAN, AGED 27 YEARS, PADINHAREPURAKKAL HOUSE,VETTOM P.O. PADIYAM, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENT/ 2ND RESPONDENT IN WP(C): ------------------------------------- SMT. SUDHAMANI (AGE AND HUSBAND'S/FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER, MALAPPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. T.B. REMANI THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- Cont. Case No. 1052 of 2007 -------------------------- Dated this the 7th February, 2008 J U D G M E N T The alleged contempt is in relation to the judgment dated 3.1.2007 contending that representation submitted by the petitioners in the writ petition were not forwarded to the Government by the District Officer and that therefore no decision has been taken on the said representation, as per the Government order dated 11.10.2006. Pursuant to Exhibit P4 Government order dated 11.10.2006, steps were taken by the respondent to include temporary Anganwadi Workers and Helpers who have got six months or more experience as on 15.12.2006. The applications received from these persons were verified and provisional rank list was published on 12.3.2007. The list was subsequently approved by the Selection Committee. It was approved on 25.5.2007. All the petitioners in the writ petition, except the petitioner in the Contempt of Court Case, were given appointment. Petitioner was not given appointment only because of lack of vacancy. It is further stated that the Cont. Case No. 1052 of 2007 2 petitioner will be appointed in the next ensuing vacancy. In view of the affidavit filed by the respondent, I find no reason to proceed with the Contempt of Court Case. Accordingly, the Contempt of Court Case is dropped. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma Cont. Case No. 1052 of 2007 2 K.THANKAPPAN,J CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999 ORDER 25th May, 2007