IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2011 / 11TH MAGHA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 1028 of 2010(S) ---------------------------------------------- (WP(C)NO.33028/2009 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 8/12/2009) PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ------------------------------------------- PRASANNA KUMAR K.P., AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.VISWANATHAN NAIR, KOKKOORI HOUSE, PARITHIPRA, SHORNUR PO, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA RESPONDENT(S): 1ST RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------------ K.PREMARAJAN, AGED AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN,SC,MALABAR DEVASWOM THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- Cont.Case 1028 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 31st January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Complaining of non-compliance with the directions in Annexure-I judgment, this petition has been filed. In Annexure-I judgment, this Court directed that the respondents therein will assess the available vacancies of Executive Officer-Gr.V and decide as to how many vacancies are to be filled up and on that basis, will initiate steps for filling up of those vacancies. It is alleging that quantification of the vacancies in existence have not been done so far, this petition has been filed. However, the definite stand taken by the respondent in the statement filed is that as at present there are no vacancies in the category of Executive Officer Gr.V to be filled up by promotion. 2. Although the petitioner has disputed this assertion, respondent has again reiterated its stand in its additional statement where reference is also made to Annexures R1 (a) to R1 (k). Cont.Case No. 1028 of 2010 2 3. In the light of this stand taken by the respondent and the materials available, this Court is not in a position to conclude the issue in favour of the petitioner and therefore further proceedings in this petition will not be justified. Therefore, the contempt petition has to be closed and I do so. 4. Be that as it may, it is clarified that if according to the petitioner, there are vacancies in existence, to be filled up by promotion it will be open to the petitioner to bring it to the notice of the respondent in which event, respondent will deal with that claim and pass appropriate orders in the matter. Contempt Petition is closed as above. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.A to Judge