Sijeesh. P vs Biju Prabhakar Ias
2023 Latest Caselaw 2193 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
  FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 21ST MAGHA, 1944
                 CON.CASE(C) NO. 198 OF 2023
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTWP(C) 36200/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF
                           KERALA
PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS 4,11,12 AND 13 IN THE W.P.(C):

    1     SIJEESH. P.
          AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. SASIDHARAN,
          SR VILA, MELUR.P.O., THALASSERY,
          KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670661
    2     PADMNABHAN. M
          AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. KUNHIRAMAN NAMBIAR,
          PUTHIYAVEEDU, VELIYAMPRA, P.R. NAGAR POST,
          KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670702
    3     SREEJITH. V.
          AGED 46 YEARS, S/O. NARAYANAN V.,
          CHADAYANTAVIDA HOUSE, NETTUR PO, THALASSERY,
          KANNUR, PIN - 670101
    4     ANOOP. K. K.
          AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.MUKUNDAN. K.,
          KANNOTH HOUSE, KOLARI.P.O., MUNDAYODE,
          KANNUR DISTRICT,, PIN - 670702
          BY ADV O.D.SIVADAS

RESPONDENT/2ND RESPONDENT IN W.P.(C):

          BIJU PRABHAKAR IAS,
          (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
          PETITIONER) THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, THE KERALA
          STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT
          BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
          BY ADV DEEPU THANKAN - SC.



     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 10.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
 Con.Case (C) No.198 of 2023

                                :2:


                   DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
               =========================
                   Con.Case (C) No.198 of 2023
              ==========================
             Dated this the 10th day of February, 2023


                              JUDGMENT

The petitioners contend that, in spite of the directions in

the judgment, they have not been included in the list of eligible

persons, for being engaged by the respondent.

2. However, Sri.Deepu Thankan - learned counsel for the

respondent, submitted that this Court did not direct the

petitioners be engaged, but only that their claim be considered.

He added that this has been done and that an order has also

been issued; and offered to ensure that same reaches the

petitioners within a period of two weeks from today.

3. When I consider the judgment in question, I find favour

with the submissions of Sri.Deepu Thankan that this Court did

not direct that the petitioners be engaged, but only that their

representations be considered. If the same has been done, but

to their detriment, then the KSRTC must certainly serve them

the consequent orders, so that they can invoke further

remedies.

In the afore circumstances, I close this Contempt Case, Con.Case (C) No.198 of 2023

recording the undertaking of Sri.Deepu Thankan that the order

will be issued to the petitioners within a period of two weeks

from today.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE anm Con.Case (C) No.198 of 2023

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 198/2023

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.11.2022 . IN W.P.(C) NO. 36200 ON THE FILES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.