IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 8TH ASWINA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 859 of 2010(S) NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE ORDER IN WPC.25076/2008 Dated 01/09/2008 PETITIONERS: 1. PRAVEEN S.U., S/O. SASIDHARAN NAIR, AGED 30 YEARS, L.D.CLERK, SHREE VIDYADHIRAJA HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, NEMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-20. 2. LEKHA G.NAIR, W/O. R.VENUGOPAL,AGED 41 YEARS, L.D.CLERK, SHREE VIDYADHIRAJA HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, NEMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. L.SREELEKHA, D/O. G.SREEKANTAN NAIR, AGED 36 YEARS, L.D.CLERK, SHREE VIDYADHIRAJA HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, NEMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAIR, S/O. K.PRASANNA, AGED 31 YEARS, L.D.CLERK, SHREE VIDYADHIRAJA HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, NEMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. M.R.RESMI, D/O. G.MOHANAN NAIR, AGED 34 YEARS, L.D.CLERK, SHREE VIDYADHIRAJA HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, NEMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. A.S.GAYATHRI, D/O. P.APPUKUTTAN NAIR, AGED 31 YEARS, L.D.CLERK, SHREE VIDYADHIRAJA HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, NEMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SMT.POOJA SURENDRAN RESPONDENTS: 1. SMT.USHA TITUS, SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SMT.VALSALA KUMARI, PRINCIPAL AND CONTROLLING OFFICER, GOVERNMENT HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SANDHESH RAJA THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/09/2010, ALONGWITH COC.NO.865 & 866 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Contempt Case Nos.859, 865 & 866 OF 2010 S ------------------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT These Contempt Cases have been filed alleging that the respondents wilfully and deliberately disobeyed the interim order passed by this Court, produced as Annexure - A1. The petitioners contended that though they were paid salary for a few months in compliance with the interim order passed by this Court, payment was stopped from November 2009 onwards. It is alleged that stoppage of payment of salary would amount to contempt of Court. 2. The first respondent has filed an affidavit dated 25.9.2010 wherein it is stated as follows: “3. It is respectfully submitted that the Hon'ble High Court has issued Annexure A1 Order staying the operation and implementation of Ext.P15 Order passed by the Government. It was further directed that the salary shall be disbursed to the petitioners only on the petitioners executing separate bonds to the 2nd Contempt Case Nos.859, 865 & 866 OF 2010 S :: 2 :: respondent undertaking to repay the amount paid to them in case it is found that they are not entitled to any relief in the Writ Petition and that they are to be governed by Ext.P15. It is submitted that the petitioners were being paid the salary as per the interim order till November 2009 as stated in the contempt petition. It is submitted that the Government issued G.O.(MS) No.376/2009/H&FWD dated 30/10/09 reviewing Ext.P15 order dated 09/07/08 revising the staff strength. After the issuance of the said order, the persons who are approved as per the said order alone are entitled for the salary and hence the Government filed a modification petition along with the Counter Affidavit in the aforesaid Writ Petition for a direction to limit the payment of the salary to the staff approved by the staff fixation order dated 30/10/2009. It is submitted that the petitioners are not included in the Government Order dated 30.10.2009 and hence there is no post to accommodate the petitioners in view of the said Government Order. In the above circumstances, they are also not entitled for the payment of salary after the issuance of the Government Order. 4. It is submitted that there is no wilful non compliance of the judgment of this Hon'ble Court. The Government after considering the facts and circumstances and in view of the observation of the Contempt Case Nos.859, 865 & 866 OF 2010 S :: 3 :: Court has issued G,O.(MS) No.617/2010 dated 23/09/2010 sanctioning the payment of salary as per Annexure A1 interim order in the Writ Petition and other cases up to 31/08/2010 subject to the conditions mentioned in the above order. A true copy of the order dated 23/09/2010 sanctioning the payment of salary as per Annexure A1 interim order in the Writ Petition and other cases up to 31/08/2010 subject to the conditions mentioned in the above order. A true copy of the order dated 23/09/2010 is produced herewith and marked as Annexure R1(a). The said order has been communicated through Special messenger to the Drawing and Disbursing Officer, Shree Vidyadhiraja Homoeopathic Medical College, Nemom on 24/09/2010 for taking necessary action for the payment of salary. Hence, it is submitted that this respondent has fully complied with interim order. The delay for the non compliance of the interim order happened only because of the pendency of the petition for modification of the interim order. This respondent was under the bonafide impression that the interim order can be complied with subject to the orders passed in the modification petition. It is reiterated that this respondent has no intention to violate or disobey the orders of this Hon'ble Court. This respondent apologise for the delay in passing Annexure R1(a) order for the inconvenience caused to the Hon'ble Court.” Contempt Case Nos.859, 865 & 866 OF 2010 S :: 4 :: 3. In view of the affidavit filed by the first respondent, I do not think it is necessary to proceed with the Contempt Cases. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that the petitioners have not actually received the amount payable to them as salary, though it is stated that Ext.R1(a) order was passed. The petitioners submitted that the Contempt Cases may be kept pending till the amounts are paid to them. In view of Annexure R1(a) order, I do not think it is necessary to keep the Contempt Cases pending. I accept the explanation offered in the affidavit filed by the first respondent. However, if Ext.R1(a) is not implemented, the petitioners would be entitled to file an application to revive the Contempt Cases. The Contempt Cases are disposed of as above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/