IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 1038 of 2010(S) ---------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.9662/2010 Dated 26/03/2010 .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ------------------------------------------ P.S.AMRITHALAL ROY,S/O.P.K.SUKUMARAN, AGED 49 YEARS,ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSCUTOR GR-1, JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTGRATE COURT-III, NEYYATINKARA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SMT.POOJA SURENDRAN SRI.ANIL KUMAR SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 3 & 1 OF WP(C). ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SRI.M.SOMASEKHARAN, (FATHER'S NAME & AGED: NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), ADDL.SECRETARY(RETD. CONVENOR OF THE DEPARMENTAL PROMOTION COMMITTEE FOR PREPARING THE SELECT LIST FOR PROMOTION TO THE POST OF DEPUTY.DIRECTOR OF PROSECUTION AND SENIOR ASSISTANT.PUPBLIC PROSECUTOR, HOME.DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM, RESIDING AT 'REMANEEYAM' TC 39/185(2), KGA/15,KAVERIGARDENS, CHALAI P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 36. 2. SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR,(FATHERS NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER)SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,HOME DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY SRI.K.K.RAVINDRANATH, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTOR. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- C.O.(C). NO. 1038 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT This C.O.(C) has been filed alleging non-compliance with the directions in order dated 26.3.2010 in W.P.(C).No.9662/2010. When this matter is taken up today, the learned Director General of Prosecution made available a copy of the order passed by the Government after considering the claim of the petitioner in terms of the directions in Annexure-I order viz., G.O(RT) No.3527/2010/Home dated 25.11.2010. A perusal of the same would reveal that the order was passed after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. True that there occured some delay in passing the said order. Evidently, hearing was conducted within the time stipulated as per Annexure-I order. I am of the view that since the respondents have already passed orders pursuant to the directions in Annexure-I, there is no reason or justification to continue with this contempt case. Therefore, recording the fact that the respondents have already passed orders in compliance with the directions in Annexure-I order, this C.O.(C) is closed. However, it is made clear that it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the said G.O dated 25.11.2010 in appropriate proceedings, in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the same. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc C.O.(C) NO.1038/2010 2 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. C.O.(C) NO.1038/2010 3 JUDGMENT September, 2010