IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 7TH ASWINA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 1252 of 2008(S) -------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.13356/2008 Dated 22/04/2008 ..................................................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER ------------------------- E.KRISHNADAS, S/O. P.DEVADAS, AGED 37 YEARS, SRI.KRISHNA KRIPA, PANNIKODE P.O., KUNISSERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN RESPONDENT/2ND RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------- ANILKUMAR, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. A.J. VARGHESE THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Cont. Case (C) No. 1252 OF 2008 S = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 29th day of September 2008 J U D G M E N T The complaint is regarding the non-compliance of Annexure A1 judgment by which orders were directed to be passed on the application made by the petitioner under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. By Annexure A4, order has been passed, saying that in view of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Bill 2007 which was passed by the Legislative Assembly on 24.7.2008 the respondent is not in a position to pass orders. Virtually by Annexure A4, the application is rejected. 2. In my view, since order has been passed as per Annexure A4, the course open to the petitioner is to challenge Annexure A4 order, if he is aggrieved. 3. I do not find that any contempt has been committed warranting proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act. COC is therefore dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-