IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2011 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 379 of 2011(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.5589/2011 DATED 22/2/2011 .................... PETITIONER(S): 2ND PETITIONER IN WP(C): ------------------------------------------------------------------ BINU LEELAMMA, AGED 37 YEARS, W/O.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, VADAKKE ARIVENNUR HOUSE, PATHIYOORKALA MURI, PATHIYOOR VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN, SRI.R.REJI, SMT.THARA THAMBAN, SRI.B.BIPIN SMT.REVATHY P.NAIR. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 IN THE WP(C): ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. HARIKISHORE I.A.S., AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, WORKING AS SUB COLLECTOR, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, CHENGANNUR, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT-689 121. 2. RASHEED, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, WORKING AS THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KARTHIKAPALLY, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 516. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SR. P.NARAYANAN THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- Comtempt Case(C) No.379 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of March 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court alleging contumacious act on the part of the respondent stating that Annexure - IV order has been passed without giving effect to Annexure - I order dated 22/02/2011 granting interim stay. 2. Going by the materials on record, it is seen that Annexure – I order was passed by this Court granting interim stay of 'one month' on 22- 02-2011, whereas Annexure – IV has been passed by the concerned Sub Collector, (who is the 2nd respondent in the Writ Petition and the 1st respondent herein) on 19-02-2011. In other words, Annexure -IV order was passed by the concerned respondent three days prior to the interim order dated 22-02-2011 passed by this Court. There is no case for the petitioner in the contempt petition that Annexure – IV order has been passed to circumvent Ext.P1 order showing the same as passed with a predate on 19-02-2011, after coming to know about Annexure – I order, so as to constitute contempt. The only the contention of the petitioner is that Annexure – IV order was not communicated to the petitioner on time. This Court finds that there is no wilful disobedience on the part of the respondent in passing Annexure – IV. C.O.(C) No.379/2011 - 2 - 3. In the said circumstances, no interference is warranted and the contempt petition is dismissed, however without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the petitioner to challenge Annexure – IV in accordance with the relevant provisions of law, by way of other appropriate proceedings. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE vdv