IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 533 of 2010(S) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.18890/2007 Dated 03/02/2009 ............... PETITIONER / PETITINER IN WPC : --------------------------------------------------- T.PURUSHOTHAMAN, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.RAMAN, THAYAMBATH HOUSE, KELOTHU, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR. BY ADVS. SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT SRI.K.N.ABHILASH SMT.R.LEELA RESPONDENTS / 2ND RESPONDENTS IN WPC : ------------------------------------------------------------------ TOMIN J. THACHENKERY, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NORTH ZONE, KOZHIKKODE. *ADDL.R2 IMPLEADED *2. MR. SUDHESH KUMAR, INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NORTH ZONE, KANNUR. *IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R2 VIDE ORDER DT. 21.7.2010 IN I.A. NO. 300/10. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.J. RAJASREE BY ADV. SMT. SHAMEENA SALAHUDEEN THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- Con.Case(C).No. 533 of 2010(S) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE'S ANNEXURE AI : CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 3/2/2009 IN WP(C) 18890/2007 BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURE'S - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ Cont.Case (C) NO. 533 OF 2010 ===================== Dated this the 8th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T The contempt petition has been filed on the allegation that further action based on the judgment of this Court in WP(C) No.18890/07 has not been taken. On behalf of the additional 2nd respondent, who has been subsequently impleaded by order dated 21/7/2010 submits that he has been wrongly impleaded and he has nothing to do with the writ petition. 2. Be that as it may, on behalf of the 1st respondent, learned Government Pleader has obtained instructions in the matter and submits that the Additional Director General of Police, North Zone, Kozhikode has already passed order dated 4/7/2009 in compliance with the judgment. Now that such an order has been passed, the contempt petition is closed leaving it open to the petitioner to work out his remedies against the said order, if he is aggrieved by the same. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp //True Copy// PA to Judge