IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 18TH MAGHA 1929 Con.Case(C).No.23 of 2008(S) ------------------------------------------------------------ ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.28165/2007 Dated 03/10/2007 .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER:- ------------------------------------- AMBIKAPULLIYADIRI AMMA, 60 YEARS OF AGE, HEREDITARY TRUSTEE, VARIANKODE DEVASWOM, D/O LATE K.NEELAKANTAN NAMBOOTHIRI, CHIRUTHETHUTHEKKETHIL HOUSE, THIRUNAVAYA, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA RESPONDENT/ 2ND RESPONDENT:- -------------------------------------------------- SHRI. PURUSHOTHAMAN, (AGE & FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) COMMISSIONER, HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA. THIS CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) No.23 of 2008-S ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 7th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. The only prayer that was sought for by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.28165/2007 was to direct the second respondent in the writ petition to convene a meeting of the Board of Trustees exclusively to consider the no-confidence motion moved by the petitioner and two other members of the Trustee Board. (2). This Court, by order dated 3rd October, 2007 has disposed of the writ petition with the following directions. They are as under: “Writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent/Commissioner to do the needful in the matter within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.” (3). Alleging that the respondent has not complied with the orders and directions issued by this Court in the writ petition, the complainant is before this Court. In this contempt case, the request is to initiate appropriate contempt proceedings against the respondent and to punish him for the so called wilful and deliberate disobedience of the orders and directions issued by this Court. (4). During the pendency of the contempt case, the respondent COC No.23/2008 -2- has passed an order dated 2-1-2008, (5).The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/ complainant would submit that the orders passed by the respondent is not in compliance with the orders and directions issued by this Court. (4). For the present, we do not intend to enter into that issue. Since the respondent has passed an order dated 2-1-2008, the petitioner is at liberty to question the same before appropriate Forum. Therefore, the contempt case is closed. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE MS