IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 626 of 2008(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.27733/2006 Dated 20/10/2006 .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- MANU, AGED 30, S/O.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, THUSHARA, KATTUVILA VENKULAM, EDAVA P.O., EDAVA VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) RESPONDENT: ------------------------ N.AYYAPPAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.I.V. PRAMOD THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss S.SIRI JAGAN, J ============== C.O.C.No. 626 OF 2008 ==================== Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner complains of non-compliance with the direction in Annexure A1 judgment. In Annexure A1 judgment, I directed the 2nd respondent in the writ petition to consider Ext.P2 and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of that judgment. 2. Admittedly, an order has been passed, but the petitioner would submit that, that order is not in accordance with the directions in the judgment. But in the judgment, I do not find any other direction other than to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2. As such, if the petitioner is aggrieved by that order, the remedy lies in challenging the same appropriately. Therefore, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the orders passed pursuant to Annexure A1 judgment, this contempt case is closed. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE bkn/-