Sunil Kumar vs Biju Prabhakar Ias
2021 Latest Caselaw 23139 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
 WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA,
                                 1943
                   CON.CASE(C) NO. 491 OF 2021
 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.12.2018 IN WP(C)NO.38035 OF
                   2018 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER:

            SUNIL KUMAR
            AGED 41 YEARS
            S/O.LATE RAJAN,KURIYAKKATTIL HOUSE,
            EDAYAR.P.O, EDAYAR,KOOTHATTUKULAM,
            ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
            BY ADVS.
            ALIAS M.CHERIAN
            SRI.K.M.RAPHY
            SMT.ANJALY ELIAS
            SHRI.BRISTO S PARIYARAM


RESPONDENT:

            BIJU PRABHAKAR IAS
            AGE AND FATHER NAME OF THE RESPONDENT IS NOT
            KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER
            THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
            CORPORATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,TRANSPORT
            BHAVAN,FORT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695023.
            BY ADV DEEPU THANKAN, SC FOR KSRTC


THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION     ON   24.11.2021,   THE    COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Cont.case(c)491 OF 2021          2

                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed this Contempt Case, alleging non-

compliance of the directions contained in Annexure-A1 judgment

of this Court dated 17.12.2018 in W.P.(C)No.38035 of 2018,

whereby that writ petition was disposed of by directing the

respondent herein to consider and pass appropriate orders on

Exts.P4 and P5 applications made by the petitioner, strictly in

accordance with law, with notice to the petitioner, his mother and

also the appellants in Ext.P2 appeal, within a period of three

months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of that

judgment. In the said judgment, it was made clear that this Court

has not expressed anything as to the entitlement or eligibility of

the petitioner for appointment under dying in harness scheme,

and it is for the respondent herein to take appropriate decision,

strictly in accordance with law. All legal and factual contentions

raised by the petitioner were left open to be raised before the 2 nd

respondent at appropriate stage.

2. On 08.03.2021, when this Contempt Case came up for

admission, the learned Standing Counsel for KSRTC was directed

to get instructions.

3. On 21.10.2021, the learned Standing Counsel for

KSRTC submitted that the respondent shall issue a formal order,

pursuant to the directions contained in Annexure A1 judgment,

within two days.

4. Today, when the case is taken up for consideration,

the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the

respondent has already complied with the directions contained in

Annexure A1 judgment.

Recording the above submission made by the learned

counsel for the petitioner, this Contempt Case is closed.

Sd/-

                                          ANIL K. NARENDRAN
                                                JUDGE
yd
 Cont.case(c)491 OF 2021      4


                          APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE A1        CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED

17/12/2018 IN WP(C)NO.38035 OF 2018 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.

ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO.PL15/002526/18 DATED 08/05/2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE