IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 514 of 2010(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WA.23090/2009 DATED 19/08/2009 .................... PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS: ------------------------------- 1. SUJA PILLAI K. D/O. M.A.KUMARA PILLAI, AGED 32, PLAPPALLI MADHOM HOUSE, KAVUMPDY, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA-686661. 2. SAJESH PILLAI K, SON OF M.A. KUMARA PILLAI, AGED 28 YEARS, PLAPPALLI MADHOM HOUSE, KAVUMAPDY, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT KERALA-686661. BY ADV. SRI.S.EASWARAN SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN (IRIMPANAM) RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. MR. KULDEEP CHATURVEDI, AGED ABOUT 52, FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, HUBLI, KARNATAKA STATE-20. 2. MR. ADITHYA SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 49, FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN CHIEF MATERIAL MANAGER, PERSONNEL BRANCH, SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, HUBLI, KARNATAKA STATE-20. BY SRI. N.B.SUNIL NATH, SC, RAILWAYS THIS CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, CJ. & P.N.Ravindran, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Contempt Case (Civil) No. 514 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT Ravindran, J. Sri.N.B.Sunil Nath, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the directions issued by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, as modified by this Court by Annexure A1 judgment has been complied with and terminal benefits payable in respect of late M.A. Kumara Pillai have been disbursed to the petitioners on 22.04.2010. 2. Sri.S. Easwaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the quantification of terminal benefits is not correct and that further amounts are due from the respondents. In our considered opinion, the dispute if any, regarding the quantification of the terminal benefits, which the petitioners are entitled to claim, cannot be decided in this Contempt Case. In the said circumstances, as the directions in the judgment have already been implemented, we are of the COC No.514 of 2010 -:2:- opinion that no further orders are called for in this Contempt Case. It is accordingly closed, leaving open the petitioners' right to challenge the quantification of the terminal benefits and seeking appropriate reliefs in other appropriate proceedings. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ttb