Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 5773 Ker
Judgement Date : 20 February, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1945
CON.CASE(C) NO. 2591 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT WP(C) 15921/2018 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONERS/WRIT PETITIONERS NO.21, 22, 24 & 26:
1 ABRAHAM GEORGE
AGED 59 YEARS, S/O GEORGE
DRIVER GR-II (RETRD.), KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION, PUNALUR DEPOT AND RESIDING AT VILAYIL LIJI
BHAVAN, VENCHEMBUR-P.O., PUNALUR, PIN - 691333
2 SHAMEEM, M.H
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O MOHAMMED HANEEFA, DRIVER GR. II, KERALA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KOTTARAKARA DEPOT AND RESIDING AT
HASHIMJI MANZIL, NEDUVATHOOR-P.O., KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 691507
3 A SANTHOSH
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O AYYAPPAN PILLAI, DRIVER GR.II, KERALA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CHADAYAMANGALAM DEPOT AND RESIDING
AT ANANDABHAVAN, KUTTIKKADU-P.O., KADAKKAL, KOLLAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 691536
4 BABURAJ P
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O VELAYUDHAN PILLAI, MECHNIC (UPHOLSTERRY) (RETD) ,
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REGIONAL
WORKSHOP, EDAPPAL AND RESIDING AT PALARI HOUSE, P.O.
ODDANAM, MURICKAL ROAD, PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 676303
BY ADVS.
N.UNNIKRISHNAN
JAYACHANDRAN C.
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NOS.3 IN WP(C):
SHRI. BIJU PRABHAKAR, IAS
AGED 57 YEARS
S/O THACHADIPRABHAKARAN, CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING
DIRECTOR,KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023 AND
ON.CASE(C) NO. 2591 OF 2023
2
RESIDING AT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695023
SRI. DEEPU THANKAN, SC
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 20.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ON.CASE(C) NO. 2591 OF 2023
3
JUDGMENT
After arguing this matter for some time, the
learned counsel for the petitioners -
Sri.N.Unnikrishnan, submitted that this contempt
case is not pressed; but sought liberty for his
client to challenge the new order issued by the
respondent in terms of law. He argued that the order
now issued is illegal and is liable to be
interdicted for various grounds; for which, he
intents to invoke appropriate remedies.
In the afore circumstances, this contempt case
is closed; with the afore requested liberty being
fully reserved to the petitioners; for which
purpose, all rival contentions are also left open in
that regard.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE SAS ON.CASE(C) NO. 2591 OF 2023
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 2591/2023
PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 16.08.2022 IN
Annexure 2 A COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20.01.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE FIRST PETIITONER DURING THE HEARING RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES
Annexure R1(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03/01/2024 ISSUED BY THE CORPORATION
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!