IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2011 / 13TH ASHADHA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 709 of 2011(S) -------------------------------------------- [AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.36142/2010 DATED 03/12/2010] .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN W.P.(C): ----------------------------------------------------- BHAVYA P.KASSIM, W/O.ADV.K.A.RIYAZ, KOODATHUNKAL, MUNICIPAL JUNCTION, CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.S.PRADEEP. RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.1 IN W.P.(C): ------------------------------------------------------------------ K.S.SREEDHARAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICE, IDUKKI DIVISION, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685 584. BY SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,A.S.G OF INDIA. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CON. CASE (C).NO.709/2011-S: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE-I: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.36142/2010 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT DTD. 03/12/2010. ANNEXURE-II: COPY OF THE LETTERS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENT DTD. 21/02/2011. ANNEXURE III: COPY OF THE REPLY DTD. 28/02/2011 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Cont. Case (C) No. 709 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 4th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner complains of non-compliance with the directions in Annexure I judgment. In Annexure I judgment, I directed the 1st respondent in the writ petition to consider and pass orders on Ext. P2 within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of judgment. Apparently, an order has been passed, which the petitioner herself has produced. Therefore, I do not find any reason to continue proceedings in this contempt case. Accordingly, the contempt case is closed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the order now passed appropriately, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the same. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/