IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2009 / 18TH POUSHA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 1807 of 2008(S) ------------------------------- JUDGMENT DATED 22.7.2008 IN W.P.(C) NO.6466/2008 PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER IN WP: -------------------------------- THULASIKUNJAMMA.K., AGED 78, W/O.LATE KESAVAN UNNITHAN NARANATH KIZHAKKETHIL, PALLIKKANAKKU P.O., KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.C.CHERIAN RESPONDENT(S): 1ST RESPONDENTS IN WP: -------------------------------------- B.RAVEENDRAN, AGED 50, FATHER'S NAME (NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A&E), KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED FAZIL THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- C.O.C.No.1807 of 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT This Contempt Case is filed alleging that the respondent willfully and deliberately disobeyed the directions issued by this Court in the Writ Petition. 2. Learned Government Pleader submitted that the question of law involved in the case and that involved in Aisha Kunju vs. Deputy Director of Education (2004 (2) KLT 174) came up for consideration before a Division Bench and doubting the correctness of the decision 2004(2) KLT 174, the Division Bench has referred the matter to the Full Bench. It is submitted that in view of the pendency of the matter before the Full Bench, no final order was passed pursuant to the order in the present Writ Petition. 3. In the facts and circumstances mentioned above, I am of the view that, for the time being, the Contempt Case can be closed with liberty to the petitioner to file a memo, after disposal of the matter by the Full Bench, to revive the Contempt Case, if COC No.1807/2008 2 it becomes necessary. Such a course is being adopted to avoid unnecessary expenditure to be incurred by the petitioner and also to avoid the pendency of this Contempt Case. It is also brought to my notice by the learned Government Pleader that against the judgment in this Writ Petition, Writ Appeal No.43/09 was filed. However, there is delay in filing the Writ Appeal. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed with liberty to the petitioner to file a memo to revive the same if it becomes necessary, after disposal of the matter by the Full Bench (the reference having been arisen as per the order in W.P.(C) No.331/08) and also after the disposal of W.A.No.43/09. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl