IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2008 / 24TH ASHADHA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 771 of 2008(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.23339/2007 Dated 19/11/2007 .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER ---------------------------- G.VISWANATHA PILLAI, S/O.APPUKUTTAN PILLAI, AGED 52 YEARS, DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.A.K.ALEX SRI.K.P.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT: ------------------------ NEELA GANGADHARAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.R.SREELATHA THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- Cont.Case (C). 771/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 15th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT I have considered Annexure-3 and Annexure-4 orders and I heard learned counsel on both sides. Even if the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the reasons stated in Annexure-3 are not sufficient to deny the petitioner a promotion as Tahasildar, is accepted, I do not think that it is a matter which can be taken cognizance of under the Contempt of Courts Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that Annexure-3 order has been independently challenged in the writ petition. Obviously petitioner is entitled to seek appropriate reliefs in the said writ petition. In the circumstances, Contempt of Court case is closed. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs