IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD SEPTEMBER 2008 / 12TH BHADRA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 1105 of 2008(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.903/2008 .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WPC NO.903/08 ------------------------------------------------------ SURESH.D., 29 YEARS, S/O.A.DAMODARAN NAIR, D.S.ELECTRICALS CB.4332, TC.42/855 LEELA BHAVAN, VALAKADAVU PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.AJITH KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS:RESPONDENTS IN WPC NO.903/08 ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. P.J.THOMAS, CHIEF SECRETARY (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. K.J.MATHEW, PRINCIPAL HOME SECRETARY (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. SANJAY KOUL, DISTRICT COLLECTOR, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. BABU RAJ, CHIEF ENGINEER (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) BUILDINGS AND LOCAL WORKS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. P.MOHAN, SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) PWD ELECTRICAL DIVISION, PUBLIC OFFICE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. COC NO.1105/08 -2- 6. ABDUL LATHEEF (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ELECTRICAL DIVISION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== Cont.Case (C) NO. 1105 OF 2008 ==================== Dated this the 3rd day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T WP(C) No.903/08 was disposed of directing that the payment due to the petitioner shall be settled within four months of production of a copy of that judgment. It is complaining of non payment of the dues, this contempt was filed. 2. Learned Government Pleader on instruction submits that on 18/8/2008, an amount of Rs.59,17,413 has been paid. Though the counsel for the petitioner has a case that this amount does not fully discharge the liability, since this is a contentious issue, I do not think it proper for this Court to pronounce on the same. 3. Therefore, I direct that if the petitioner has a case that further amounts are due, it will be open to the petitioner to take up the matter with the 2nd respondent, in which case, that claim of the petitioner will be duly considered. Contempt of court case is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp