IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2009 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 132 of 2009(S) -------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.24335/2008 Dated 12/08/2008 .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER IN WPC --------------------------------------------- V.S.GEORGE, S/O.SAMUEL,AGED 57 YRS, VALIPLACKAL, KUMPAZHA.P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. MR.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT IN WPC ----------------------------------------------------- ANIL KUMAR, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITITONER)ASST.ENGINEER,OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER,P.H.SECTION, NO.1/11, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, PATHANAMTHITTA. MR. N. DINESH - SC THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- Contempt Case (C)No.132 OF 2009 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT The Contempt Case is filed against non-compliance with the directions in Annexure-A2 judgment. In Annexure-A2 judgment, I directed as follows: “xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx The petitioner shall file a petition before the 2 nd respondent for assistance for repairing the leaks. The Water Authority shall get appropriate permission from the PWD authorities for cutting the road. The expenses for the entire process shall be borne by the petitioner as per the directions of the Water Authority”. 2. The learned Standing Counsel for the Water Authority submits that as early as on 19.8.2008 permission had been obtained from the PWD authorities for cutting the road and a copy of the same has been communicated to the petitioner. He further submits that in that order, it has been directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,175/- assessed as the damages for expenses for restoration of the road after cutting the road. The learned C.O.C.No.132/09 2 counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not received the same. Therefore, I directed the learned Standing Counsel for the Water Authority to hand over a copy of the order to the learned counsel for the petitioner, which has been handed over. In view of the same, it is now for the petitioner to take appropriate steps based on that order. Therefore, this contempt case is closed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd C.O.C.No.132/09 3