Sujitha P vs Anil Kumar N
2023 Latest Caselaw 8906 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
         MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1945
                       CON.CASE(C) NO. 394 OF 2023
  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 34097/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONERS:

     1       SUJITHA P
             AGED 43 YEARS, W/O SASEENDRAN NAIR V N, POURNAMI HOUSE,
             MULAVOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK THRIKKALATHUR,
             MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK,ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 683541
     2       SASEENDRAN NAIR V N
             AGED 48 YEARS, POURNAMI, KAVUMPADY, MULAVOOR VILLAGE,
             MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK THRIKKALATHUR, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK
             ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 683541
             BY ADVS.
             LUKE J CHIRAYIL
             ELSA MARY THOMAS
             AMAL JOSE


RESPONDENTS:

             ANIL KUMAR N
             AGED 52 YEARS, SON OF NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER THE
             SECRETARY PAYIPRA GRAMA PANCHAYAT PEZHAKKAPPILLY P.O.,
             MUVATTUPUZHA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA,, PIN - 686673

             BY ADV
             C.A.Navas
             SMT. K M RESHMI - SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER


     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 14.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Con.Case.(C) No.394 OF 2023

                                     2




                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 14th day of August, 2023

W.P.(C) No.34097 of 2022 was disposed of on 27.10.2022

with the following directions : -

"In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent- Secretary to Grama Panchayat to consider Ext.P11 representation submitted by the 1st petitioner and take a decision thereon in accordance with law within a period of six weeks after giving an opportunity of hearing the petitioners as well as the 3rd respondent. It is made clear that this Court has not pronounced anything on merit on the source of pollution/contamination."

2. Standing Counsel for the respondent submits that

pursuant to the said directions, the parties were heard in person

as is evidenced by Annexure-R1(c) and the Secretary to the

Panchayat has passed Annexure-R1(d) order on 11.01.2023.

The counsel for the petitioners would submit that their grievance

has not been redressed though an order has been passed. Con.Case.(C) No.394 OF 2023

As the respondent has passed an order after hearing the

parties, I am of the view that the directions given by this Court

stand substantially complied with. If the petitioners are

aggrieved by Annexure-R1(d), the petitioners will have to invoke

their remedies. In view of the above, the Contempt of Court

case is closed, granting liberty to the petitioners to challenge

Annexure-R1(d) before appropriate forum in accordance with

law.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE ded Con.Case.(C) No.394 OF 2023

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 394/2023

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.

(C) NO. 34097 OF 2022 DATED 27.10.2022 ON THE FILES OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA

RESPONDENT ANNEXURES

ANNEXURE R1(C) THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECORDS OF HEARING CONDUCTED ON 09.01.2023 ANNEXURE R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ANALYTICAL REPORT NO.10141/22-23 DATED 16.12.2022 ISSUED BY REGIONAL ANALYTICAL LABORATORY, ERNAKULAM ANNEXURE R1(D) THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A7/1225/2020 DATED 11.01.2023 ANNEXURE R1(B) THE TRUE COPY OF THE HEARING NOTICE NO.A7/1225/2020 DATED 03.01.2023 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT ANNEXURE R1(E) TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O (ORDINARY) NO.82/2023/ LSGD DATED 11.01.2023 ISSUED BY THE LOCAL SELF DEPARTMENT