Kerala High Court
Reena Abraham vs Dr.K.Jayathilak, Ias on 5 April, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1944
CON.CASE(C) NO. 298 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.08.2021 AND THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT DATED
05.11.2021 IN OP(KAT) 213/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS IN O.P(KAT):
1 REENA ABRAHAM
AGED 48 YEARS
W/O.G.AJU, LILIT GARDENS KANNANCODE, ADOOR P.O.,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 691 523, PRESENTLY
WORKING AS TRACER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF
SURVEY (RANGE), PATHANAMTHITTA PO, PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT - 689 645.
2 SAM DANIEL
AGED 43 YEARS
S/O.DANIEL VALLUVELIL, KAROTTU VEEDU, KODUMON P.O.,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 691 555, PRESENTLY
WORKING AS TRACER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF
SURVEY (RANGE), PATHANAMTHITTA PO., PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT - 689 645.
3 RAJESHKUMAR
AGED 43 YEARS
S/O.VASUDEVAN, MEENCHIRAKKAL HOUSE, MEZHUVELI P.O.,
PATHANAMTHTITA, PIN - 689 507, PRESENTLY WORKING AS
TRACER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF SURVEY
(RANGE), PATHANAMTHITTA PO.,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689 645.
4 PRATHEESH P.
AGED 51 YEARS
S/O.KUNHAN P., PUTTATHU HOUSE, MUKKOM P.O., KOZHIKODE
DISTRICT PRESENTLY WORKING AS TRACER, OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF SURVEY (RANGE), KOZHIKODE
DISTRICT, PIN - 673 020.
5 SMITHA P.S.
AGED 46 YEARS
W/O.MANOJKUMAR, KAKKANATTU HOUSE, THRIPRAYAR,
VALAPPAD P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 567,
Cont.Case (Civil) No.298 of 2022
2
PRESENTLY WORKING AS TRACER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT
DIRECTOR OF SURVEY (RANGE), THRISSUR, THRISSUR
DISTRICT, PIN - 680 022.
BY ADVS.
K.MOHANAKANNAN
H.PRAVEEN (KOTTARAKARA)
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN O.P(KAT):
1 DR.K.JAYATHILAK, IAS
AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 SREERAM SAMBASIVA RAO IAS
AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS,
THE DIRECTOR OF SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS, DIRECTORATE
OF SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.
3 BONI KURIAKOSE
AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS
SECRETARY, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM
PALACE (PO), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.
BY ADVS.
ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
GOVERNMENT PLEADER(GP-1)
SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL, SR.GOVT.PLEADER
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
Cont.Case (Civil) No.298 of 2022
3
ALEXANDER THOMAS & VIJU ABRAHAM, JJ.
=================================
Cont.Case (Civil) No.298 of 2022
[arising out of the order dated 26.08.2021 & impugned judgment
dated 05.11.2021 in O.P(KAT) No.213/2021]
=================================
Dated this the 05th day of April, 2022
JUDGMENT
Alexander Thomas, J.
The above contempt of court case arises out of the alleged
non-compliance of the directions issued by this Court, as per Annexure
A-1 interim order dated 26.08.2021 in O.P(KAT) No.213/2021.
Subsequently, this Court has finally disposed of the said O.P(KAT), as per
Annexure A-2 judgment rendered on 05.11.2021.
2. The Public Service Commission has taken the stand that they
have taken the decision to advise 110 candidates on 06.08.2021, which
was before the rendering of Annexure A-1 interim order on 26.08.2021.
Further, it is also relevant note para Nos.8 to 15 of Annexure A-2
judgment in the O.P(KAT), which reads as follows :
"8. We querried to Sri.Antony Mukkath, learned Senior
Government Pleader as to whether appointment orders have been
issued to all the 110 candidates advised by the PSC on 06.08.2021,
etc. We are apprised by the learned Senior Government Pleader that
he has only telephonic instructions and that as of now only one
vacancy is existing and he does not have precise instructions on the
querry of this Court.
Cont.Case (Civil) No.298 of 2022
9. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered that
if appointment orders have not been issued as on today, in respect of
the last 5 candidates out of the 110 candidates advised by the PSC,
then no appointment orders may be issued to such last 5 candidates
advised by the PSC.
10. Needless to say, as already ordered by the Tribunal, the
advice and appointment of candidates will be subject to the result of
the pending O.A. The appointing authority, 2nd respondent (Director
of Survey and Land Records) will ensure that a copy of the
appointment chart in respect of all the 110 candidates advised by the
PSC along with their present postal addresses, shall be immediately
furnished to the 1st petitioner by Registered Speed Post with
Acknowledgment Due, for necessary information.
11. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would
submit that they will immediately take steps to amend the pleas in
the original application to incorporate challenge as against the
advice and appointment of candidates as against the 25% of the 110
posts covered by Anx.A5 order by impleading the affected persons,
etc.
12. It is for the petitioners to proceed as per law. It is further
made clear that the right of the candidates to get advised and
appointed will be subject to the final result of the O.A.
13. Further, the parties may complete the pleadings without
any further delay and the Tribunal may consider the facilitation of
early final disposal of the main matter in O.A. No.1518/2021, without
much delay, preferably within a period of 4 to 5 months or within
any reasonable time limit that may found appropriate and
reasonable by the Tribunal, taking into account the interest of
administration of justice.
14. We would further make it clear that we have not entered
into the merits of the final controversy and we have only taken the
prima facie view and it is for the Tribunal to render its final verdict
in the matter, independently.
15. The interim order dated 09.08.2021, rendered by the
Tribunal in the above O.A. will stand modified as above."
3. After having heard both sides and after having perused
separate affidavits filed by R1 & R2 herein, we are of the view that the
contempt of court case need not be kept pending and liberty could be
Cont.Case (Civil) No.298 of 2022
accorded to the petitioners herein to raise all other issues in the O.A that
is pending before the Tribunal.
In the light of these aspects, the above contempt of court case, will
stand disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM, JUDGE
vgd
Cont.Case (Civil) No.298 of 2022
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 298/2022
PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN OP(KAT)
213/2021 DATED 26/8/2021.
ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
5/11/2021 IN OP(KAT) 213/2021.
ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 7/9/2021
SENT BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE PSC.
ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 7/9/2021
SENT BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE ADDITIONAL
CHIEF SECRETARY.
ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 7/9/2021
SENT BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE DIRECTOR OF
SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
ANNEXURE A6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER THE
RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT BY ONE ADV.PRAKASH D
FOR GETTING THE DETAILS DATE 8/12/2021.
ANNEXURE A7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE
PSC DATED 3/1/2022.
ANNEXURE A8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER THE
RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT BY ADV.D.PRAKASH
DATED 30/10/2021.
ANNEXURE A9 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT TO ADV.D.PRAKASH WITH
ANNEXURES DATED 22/11/2021.
ANNEXURE A10 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED ON
27/10/2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A11 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED ON
27/10/2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
