P.Kunjabdulla vs Shaik Darvesh Saheb
2021 Latest Caselaw 23373 Ker

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
       Thursday, the 25th day of November 2021 / 4th Agrahayana, 1943
          CONTEMPT CASE(C) NO. 1888 OF 2021(S) IN WP(C) 19523/2020
PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS:

  1. P. KUNJABDULLA, AGED 61 YEARS, S/O.EDAKKAVIL MAMMUNHI, FARSANA
     MANZIL, P.O. KOTTAPPURAM, NEELESWARAM, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
  2. K.N. ABDUL RASHEED, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.K.P. ABDULLA, AMINA MANZIL,
     P.O. KOTTAPPURAM, NEELESWARAM, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

    BY ADVS. M/S. S.SANAL KUMAR, BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN, T.J.SEEMA.

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.2:


     SHAIK DARVESH SAHEB,
     DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS & CORRECTIONAL SERVICES,
     PRISONS HEADQUARTERS, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 012.

     BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     This Contempt of court case (civil) having come up for orders on
25.11.2021, the court on the same day passed the following:

                                                    P.T.O.
                      SUNIL THOMAS, J.
            ----------------------------------------
             Cont. Case(C.) No.1888 of 2021
              in W.P.(C.) No. 19523 of 2020
           -----------------------------------------
        Dated this the 25th day of November, 2021

                          ORDER

A memo has been produced by the learned

Government Pleader producing the reports received from

concerned District Police Chief along with the proceedings

of the Director General of Prisons & Correctional Services.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner oppose the

contentions on the basis that though technically the

respondent disposed of the representation and complied

with the directions of this Court, still the Contempt

survives, since the points which were directed to be

specifically considered by this Court have not been

Considered. This Court by judgment dated 06.09.2021

had given directions contained in paragraph 10 in the

light of the observations made in paragraph 8 to be kept

in mind while deciding the issue. Primarily, it seems that

this has not been answered. The respondent shall file an Cont. Case(C.) No.1888 of 2021 in W.P.(C.) No. 19523 of 2020

affidavit disclosing the reason for the delay in passing

the order.

Post the Contempt Case on 13.12.2021. This will

not preclude the petitioner from challenging the

proceedings of the respondent dated 18.11.2021

independently, if he is so advised.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

SKP/25-11

25-11-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar