Sulu S.S vs V.Venu
2021 Latest Caselaw 13021 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
     THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 27TH JYAISHTA, 1943
                     CON.CASE(C) NO. 2044 OF 2018
 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 29166/2017 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN W.P.:

          SULU S.S
          AGED 53 YEARS
          D/O LATE S.S. SRIRAM,
          KAVUNGAL NIVAS, 9TH STREET,
          AMBIKAPURAM. P.O.,
          PALAKKAD-678011
          BY ADV SHANKAR V.


RESPONDENTS:

    1     V.VENU
          FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
          PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
          FOREST AND WILDLIFE,
          SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
    2     SHEIK HYDER HASSAN
          AGED 1 YEARS
          FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
          CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND CUSTODIAN OF VESTED
          FORESTS,EASTERN CIRCLE,OLAVAKKODE,PALAKKAD-678002.



          BY SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE,SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER


THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 17.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Con.Case(C).No.2044 of 2018                 2

IN WP(C).29166/2017




                                 JUDGMENT

Dated this the 17th day of June,2021

This contempt petition is filed by the petitioner complaining that the

directives contained in the judgment dated 14.02.2018 are not complied with.

2. Today when the matter is taken up, learned Senior Government

Pleader Sri.Surin George Ipe submitted that in compliance with the directions

issued by this Court, an order dated 18.12.2018 was passed by the Custodian

of Vested Forests holding that the subject issue as to whether the land in

question is ecologically fragile land or not, is pending consideration before the

Advisory Committee and therefore, the request made by the petitioner to put

him in possession of the property based on Exhibit P1 order passed by the

Forest Tribunal, Palakkad dated 15.6.1979 in O.A.No.34 of 1976, affirmed in

MFA No.542/1979, cannot be implemented.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner Sri.Sankar.V submitted that in fact this

Court had issued directions to the 2 nd respondent in the writ petition viz., the

Chief Conservator of Forest and Custodian of Vested Forests, who is not the

competent officer, and therefore, petitioner intends to file an application

seeking correction in the judgment rendered by this Court.

IN WP(C).29166/2017

4. I have evaluated the rival submissions made across the Bar and in my

considered opinion the directions were issued in the year 2018 to a superior

authority and a decision was taken by the Custodian of Forests in the year

2018. Now two years have elapsed since the passage of the order and it

cannot also be said that there is any wilful or contumacious act on the part of

the respondents in complying with the directions issued by this Court so as to

proceed in contempt. If there is any illegality in the orders passed, it is for the

petitioner to pursue further remedies in accordance with law. Since I do not

find any reason to proceed with the contempt petition, it is closed, leaving

open the liberty of the petitioner to challenge the order, if advised so.

Sd/-

                                                     SHAJI P.CHALY

smv                                                       JUDGE


IN WP(C).29166/2017




                      APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 2044/2018

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE
ANNEXURE 1           CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
                     W.P(C)NO.29166 OF 2O17 DATED 14/2/2018
ANNEXURE 2           TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25.6.2015
                     ISSUED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE
                     ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF
                     FOREST NORTH REGION.