For Information Purpose Only vs By Advocates
2021 Latest Caselaw 6065 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 6065 Ker
Judgement Date : 19 February, 2021

Kerala High Court

For Information Purpose Only vs By Advocates on 19 February, 2021

Con.Case(C) 250/2021                       1/3



                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                        Present:

                       THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

                Friday,the 19th day of February 2021/30th Magha,1942

              Contempt Case(C) No.250/2021(S) in WP(C) No.12437/2020


    For information purpose only
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WPC
      STUDIJA,AGED 53 YEARS, W/O. BABU RAJ
      KIZHAKEVILA VEEDU, VELIMON P.O.,KOLLAM 691511

      BY ADVOCATES
      M/S M.P.SREEKRISHNAN, A.MUHAMMED MUSTHAFA
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.2 IN WPC
      BABU RAJ.A,SECRETARY
      PERINAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KOLLAM 691511

      ADVOCATE SRI. MANOJ RAMA SWAMY, SC,
      PERINAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT FOR THE RESPONDENT

      This contempt of Court Case (Civil) having come up for orders on
19/02/2021, the Court on the same day passed the following:-




                                                                       p.t.o.
 Con.Case(C) 250/2021                              2/3




                                    ALEXANDER THOMAS
                             ----------------------------------------------------
                       Contempt of Court Case (Civil) No.250 of 2021
                         [arising out of judgment dated 24.06.2020
                                   in W.P.(C) No.12437/2020]
                                ----------------------------------------------
    For information purpose only
                          Dated this the 19th day of February, 2021

                                             ORDER

Sri.A. Muhammed Musthafa, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,

submits that until the filing of this contempt petition on 02.02.2021, the

respondent officer had not taken any steps, whatsoever for complying the

directions in Annexure A-1 judgment dated 24.06.2020 in W.P.(C) No.12437/2020

and after serving notice in the contempt petition to the counsel for the

respondent, an inspection was over hastily conducted on 07.02.2021 and an order

claiming to be a 2 page order, in which one vital page was missing, was also

hastily served on the petitioner and that the cardinal directions in Annexure A-1

judgment to serve a copy of the report of such inspection conducted to ascertain

as to whether the road in front of the petitioner's building is notified road in terms

of Section 220B of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act and if so a legal copy of such

notification is given to the petitioner in advance; and also to give opportunity of

being heard to the petitioner before a decision is taken, etc. have been blatantly violated by the respondent officer and that strict contempt action is called for in

this case.

2. If that be so, last chance is given to the respondent officer to recall the

abovesaid proceedings said to have been issued on 09.02.2021 and to pass fresh

orders in strict compliance with the directions in Annexure A-1 judgment

including the direction to give copy of the notification under Section 220B of the

Kreala Panchayath Raj Act, if it is really served on the client and also to afford

personal hearing, etc.

3. Sri.Manoj Rama Swamy, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Con.Case(C) 250/2021 3/3

Panchayat Secretary, submits that the matter may be adjourned by 2 weeks to

enable him to report compliance of the abovesaid directions by the respondent

Panchayat.

List the case on 09.03.2021.