IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER TUESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 Con.Case(C).No. 710 of 2009(S) ----------------------------------------- ARISING OUT OF JUDGMENT IN WA 1715/2005 DATED 20.01.2006 PETITIONER: ------------------- MARA PANDIAN, IAS, S/O.B.PERUMAL, AGED 51 YEARS, COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER (TAXES) SRI.VINOD CHANDRAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. SOMENATH MUKKERJI (AGE NOT KNOWN) FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, ADDITIONAL MEMBER (COMML), MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS (RAILWAY BOARD), NEW DELHI -01. 2. M.S. JAYANATH, (AGE NOT KNOWN) (FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN) GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI. 3. C.M. CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR (AGE NOT KNOWN) (FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN) DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL MANAGER-TRIVANDRUM CENTRAL, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, COMMERCIAL BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -14. 4. B. PRASANNAKUMAR, (AGE NOT KINWON) (FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN) CHIEF PARCEL SUPERVISOR, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. RAJENDRA PRASAD, (AGE NOT KNOWN) (FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN) CHIEF PARCEL SUPERVISOR, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.M.C.CHERIAN,SR.SC.,RAILWAYS ADV.SMT.ASHA CHERIAN THIS CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. ------------------------------------------ Cont. Case (C)No.710 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT A.K.Basheer, J. This contempt proceeding has been initiated by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Government of Kerala complaining that the respondents have wilfully and deliberately violated the directions/orders contained in Annexure I judgment. 2. The petitioner while referring to Annexure II communication issued by the Additional Member (Commercial) of the Railway Board, states that contents of the said communication and the action of the respondents pursuant thereto will attract the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act inasmuch as there is a wilful attempt to disobey and violate the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court in Annexure I judgment. 3. In clause (a) of the concluding paragraph of Anexure I judgment, the Division Bench had issued a direction as hereunder: Cont. case (C) No.710 of 2009. - 2 - “(a) The Railway authorities are directed to permit the Salestax officials to collect the details of consignments/consignors/consignees etc. from the railway records maintained in the Railway Goods/Parcel Offices. The Salestax authorities be permitted to effect seizure of the goods suspected of tax evasion as provided under section 93 of the Railways Act against proper receipt and execution of indemnity bonds.” 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Railway authorities are not permitting the Sales tax officials to carry out inspections at the Railway Station premises/platforms in terms of the clause extracted above. 5. In response to the above contention raised by the petitioner, the respondents have filed an affidavit contending, inter alia, that the allegations made against the respondents by the petitioner are totally untenable and misconceived. 6. Later, yet another affidavit has been filed by the Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, reiterating that the Railway authorities had not prevented the Sales tax officials from conducting any inspection at the Railway Station premises. Cont. case (C) No.710 of 2009. - 3 - While referring to Annexure II communication issued by the Additional Member, the deponent has stated thus: “............... the Railway Board have issued specific orders, fully withdrawing Annexure II order/letter dated 25.3.2009, unconditionally, in reference to the State of Kerala. Specific reference to the State is thus made because Annexure II was written by the 1st respondent to the General Manager, Chennai, for application to all the Divisions in Southern Railway, including stations outside Kerala also. However, conflict with Annexure I judgment has arisen only in Kerala. Therefore, in continuation to the restoration of status quo ante fully w.e.f. 10.7.2009 as reported in the earlier letter, now, specific orders have also been issued by Railway Board, on 13.11.2009, withdrawing Annexure II unconditionally in reference to Kerala. The respondents also hereby express unconditional apology for temporarily deviating from the directions contained in Annexure I judgment, till 10.7.2009, and pray for pardon of this Hon'ble Court for the same.” 7. In view of the unambiguous assertion made and unconditional apology tendered by the respondents, we do not find any reason to retain this contempt case on the file of this Court. In our view, petitioner's grievance must have been Cont. case (C) No.710 of 2009. - 4 - redressed by the unequivocal stand now taken by the respondents in the affidavit dated November 18, 2009. Therefore, this contempt case is closed. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice A.K. Basheer, Judge vns