IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 1ST PHALGUNA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 1808 of 2008(S) (AGAINST JUDGMENT DTD.24.9.2008 IN W.P(C).26878/08) ------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.BABURAJAN PILLAI, S/O.LATE P.KUTTAN PILLAI, AGED 56 YEARS, SHOWROOM MANAGER GRADE-I, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE COIR MARKETING FEDERATION LTD. NO.679, ALAPPUZHA, RESIDING AT AMBIKA SADANAM, P.O.NEDUNGOLAM, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.R.KIRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. K.R.ANIL, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, NAME OF THE FATHER NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE COIR MARKETING FEDERATION LTD.NO.679, ALAPPUZHA. 2. S.BAHULEYAN, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, NAME OF THE FATHER NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, PRESIDENT/CHAIRMAN, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE COIR MARKETING FEDERATION LTD.NO.679, ALAPPUZHA. R1, R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN SRI.GEORGE MATHEW THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- Cont. case (C).No.1808 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Following the judgment, on the basis of which this contempt of court case is filed, the first respondent is stated to have taken action as disclosed in para 3 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents. It reads as follows: “Even before receipt of the copy of Annexure A1, the Enquiry Officer was appointed and enquiry was also over by 06.11.2008. The Enquiry Officer submitted the report on 11.11.2008 and it was placed before the Executive Committee on 26.12.2008. In the Executive Committee held on 26.12.2008, further proceedings has been recommended also and the same will be informed to the petitioner at the earliest without further delay”. Though the petitioner has filed a reply, refuting the said allegation, it is unnecessary for this Court to entertain any further objections regarding the correctness or otherwise of the action taken by the respondents because that will be beyond the jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act. Hence, COC.1808/08 Page numbers preserving the rights of the petitioner to all remedies in relation to the disciplinary proceedings as disclosed in the portion of the counter affidavit quoted above and also as against further action that may be taken, this contempt case is closed. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge kkb.21/2.