R.Nagarajan vs John Thomas
2021 Latest Caselaw 15782 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
   FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 8TH SRAVANA, 1943
                 CON.CASE(C) NO. 958 OF 2021
  AGAINST THE ORDER IN WP(C) 10911/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF
                      KERALA, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

          R.NAGARAJAN
          AGED 57 YEARS,S/O.V.RAMASWAMY PILLAI,
          4, SUMAITHANKI STREET,
          VADIVEESWARAM, NAGERCOIL 629 002
          BY ADV.HARI KUMAR G NAIR


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS NO.2&3:

    1     JOHN THOMAS
          AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
          FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
          THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY
          HEADQUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O.,
          CHENNAI 660 003
    2     MR.SIDHARTH K. VARMA
          AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.P.N. KRISHNA VARMA,
          THE DIVSIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER,
          SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM DIVISION,
          TRIVANDRUM 695 584
          BY ADVS.
          SUMATHY DANDAPANI (SR.)
          SRI.A.DINESH RAO, SC, RAILWAYS


     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN
FINALLY HEARD ON 30.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Cont. Case (C) No.958/21            -:2:-




                                JUDGMENT

Dated this the 30th day of July, 2021

This contempt case is filed alleging violation of the order dated

30.4.2021 issued by this Court. It is alleged that even though this

Court had stayed the operation and implementation of Ext.P6 for a

period of six weeks, within two days thereafter, Annexure-A2 order

was issued by the 2nd contemnor, even after becoming aware of the

order of this Court.

2. Pursuant to the notice issued to the 2 nd contemnor, a

counter affidavit has been filed. It is mentioned in the said counter

affidavit that Annexure-A2 order was issued without becoming aware

about the order of this Court. While denying the averments in the

contempt petition, it was pointed out that the cause list for the said

day, produced as Annexure R2(a), had not shown the name of the

Standing Counsel. It is further seen averred in the counter affidavit

that even though there was no conscious action on the part of the 2 nd

contemnor to defy this Court's order, on getting instructions from the

Counsel, the order, which is alleged to be the cause of action for the

contempt, has been withdrawn.

Having regard to the fact that the order treated as the reason

for this contempt case has been withdrawn, this Court is of the view

that the contempt petition need not be proceeded further.

Accordingly, this contempt case is closed.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE vps

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S' ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.4.2021 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.10911 OF 2021 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT Annexure A2 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.ERS 50 DATED 2.5.2021 ISSUED IN RESPECT OF C.S.SURESH (WITHOUT ENCLOSURE)

RESPONDENT'S/S' ANNEXURES ANNEXURE R2(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE PAGE 1 AS WELL AS PAGE 14 OF THE CAUSE LIST DATED 30.4.2021 ANNEXURE R2(b) A TRUE COPY OF THE PROMOTION CANCELLATION LETTER NO.V/P.608/VI/CLI/Vol.III DATED 22.7.2021 ANNEXURE R2(c) TRUE COPY OF THE CORRIGENDUM NO.V/P.608/VI/CLI/Vol.III DATED 22.7.2021