Kerala High Court
Dr.Abdu Rahman.K vs Dr.Rajan Namdev Khobragade I.A.S on 4 August, 2025
Author: Anil K. Narendran
Bench: Anil K.Narendran
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1101 OF 2025 1 2025:KER:57978
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.
MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1947
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1101 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 04.03.2025 IN OP(KAT) NO.68 OF
2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS:
1 DR.ABDU RAHMAN.K
AGED 56 YEARS
S/O.KOYA.K, NURSING SUPERINTENDENT (RETIRED),
GOVERNMENT HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL,
KOZHIKODE - 673008, RESIDING AT KALLANKUDY HOUSE,
POOVATHUPARAMBA.P.O, MEDICAL COLLEGE VIA, KOZHIKODE,
KERALA, PIN-673008.
2 DR.LEO.L.K
AGED 55 YEARS
S/O.K.S.LUKA, PHARMACIST (HIGHER GRADE), GOVERNMENT
HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695009, RESIDING AT 'KANNOTH',
EZHAKODE, MALAYINKEEZHU.P.O THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
KERALA., PIN - 695571.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI
SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN
RESPONDENT/1ST RESPONDENT:
DR.RAJAN NAMDEV KHOBRAGADE I.A.S
AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS
ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, AYUSH (B)
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA., PIN - 695001.
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1101 OF 2025 2 2025:KER:57978
BY ADV. SRI.A.J.VARGHESE, SR. GP
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 04.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1101 OF 2025 3 2025:KER:57978
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran, J.
This contempt case is filed alleging willful disobedience of the direction contained in Annexure A judgment of a Division Bench of this Court dated 04.03.2025 in OP(KAT)No.68 of 2025. Paragraph 4 and also the last paragraph of that judgment read thus:
"4. We, in such circumstances, are of the view that in the larger public interest, the Government will have to take a final decision as to the policy pending on the formulation of the Special Rules to utilise the service of such personnels. We, therefore, direct the Government to take a decision in this regard, at least to permit the petitioners to serve as medical officers, pending the formulation of the Special Rules, as a special case. An appropriate decision shall be taken within a period of four weeks. This original petition is disposed of as above."
2. On 20.05.2025, when this contempt case came up for consideration, the Division Bench of this Court passed a detailed order, which reads thus:
"We note the peculiar circumstances involved in this case. Two paramedical staff underwent the BHMS course during the year 2002 under the Government quota, and became professional doctors.
2. This Court considered the petitioners' claim to permit them to continue as Medical Officers, which was earlier denied for want of Special Rules. In view of this, we directed the Government to take a decision in the matter and permit them to continue as Medical CON.CASE(C) NO. 1101 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:57978 officers till the formulation of the Special Rules. However, this request was rejected by an order dated 06.05.2025, passed by the Additional Chief Secretary to Government in AYUSH(B) Department. The rejection was mainly for the reason that, even if it is ordered, the petitioners would serve the Government only for one month. It is noted that the first petitioner retired from service on 30.04.2025 and the second petitioner is due to retire from service on 31.05.2025.
3. The petitioners point out Annexure C, wherein football player I.M.Vijayan was allowed to retire as a Deputy Commandant after creating a supernumerary post solely for one day. He was due to retire on 30.04.2025, and the order was issued on 29.04.2025. These are all matters for the Government to decide. We are of the view that, if the Chief Secretary intervenes and takes a lenient view before the petitioners retire. A proper decision shall be taken within a week, in the case of second petitioner, who is due to retire from service on 31.05.2025."
3. The said order was followed by an order dated 02.06.2025, which reads thus:
"We see that the Order dated 28.05.2025 is passed by the Additional Chief Secretary. In fact, the earlier order passed by him is questioned in the contempt case, that we never want him to pass an order again. We, in fact, directed the Chief Secretary to pass an order. Therefore, in the light of the earlier order, we direct the Chief Secretary to pass an Order and not to be relegated to anyone."
4. Today, when this contempt case came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Senior Government Pleader for the respondent would CON.CASE(C) NO. 1101 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:57978 point out G.O.(Ms.)No.310/2025/AYUSH dated 07.06.2025 issued in compliance of the direction contained in Annexure A judgment of this Court dated 04.03.2025 in OP(KAT)No.68 of 2025.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners propose to challenge the said order dated 07.06.2025 in appropriate proceedings.
In such circumstances, this contempt case is closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to challenge the aforesaid order dated 07.06.2025 in appropriate proceedings.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-
MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE DSV/-
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1101 OF 2025 6 2025:KER:57978 APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1101/2025 PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES Annexure A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4-3-2025 OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN OP(KAT)NO.68/2025.
Annexure B TRUE COPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(RT)NO.245/2025/ AYUSH DATED 06-05-2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
Annexure C TRUE COPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(MS)NO.1388/2025/ HOME DATED 29-04-2025 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT