Kerala High Court
Fr. K. K. Mathews, Son Of Kuriakose vs Rev. Fr. C. K. Issac Cor Episcopa on 17 October, 2024
Author: Anil K.Narendran
Bench: Anil K.Narendran
2024:KER:77264
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/ 25TH ASWINA, 1946
CON.APP(C) NO. 8 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2024 IN Con.Case(C) NO.1761
OF 2023 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 AND 6:
1 FR. K. K. MATHEWS, SON OF KURIAKOSE
AGED 61 YEARS, KUZHUVELIPPURAM HOUSE,
PALLARIMANGALAM P.O., POTHANIKAD, PIN - 686671.
2 NOBY SCARIA
AGED 51 YEARS
SON OF SCARIA, CHENAYAPPILLIL HOUSE, KADAVOOR
P.O., KADAVOOR, PIN - 686671.
3 ELDHOSE VARGHESE,
AGED 72 YEARS, SON OF VARGHESE, PUTHUSSERIYIL
HOUSE, PARAMBANCHERI, PULINTHANAM P.O.,
POTHANICADU, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
KERALA, PIN - 686671.
2024:KER:77264
2
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
4 BABU JOHN
AGED 51 YEARS
SON OF JOHN, VELLAKKALLEL, PULINTHANAM P.O.,
PULINTHANAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686671.
BY ADVS.
K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)
S.M.PRASANTH
T.RAMPRASAD UNNI
ASWINI SANKAR R.S.
SHEHIN S.
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS, RESPONDENTS 1, 5 AND ADDL.R7:
1 REV. FR. C. K. ISSAC COR EPISCOPA,
AGED 79 YEARS
SON OF KURIAKOSE, VICAR, ST. JOHN'S BESPHAGE
ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH, RESIDING AT
CHENAYAPPILLIL HOUSE, PARAMBANCHERRY,
PULINTHANAM P.O., POTHANICADU, MUVATTUPUZHA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 686671.
2 REV. FR. P. V. PHILIP,
AGED 74 YEARS
SON OF POTHEN ASSISTANT VICAR, ST. JOHN'S
BESPHAGE ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH, RESIDING AT
ARIMAPANCHIRAYIL HOUSE, PULINTHANAM P.O.,
POTHANICADU, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
KERALA, PIN - 686671.
3 SHIBIN K.A.
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE INSPECTOR OF
POLICE STATION AND STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
POTHANIKAD POLICE STATION, MUVATTPUZHA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 686671.
4 BASIL MATHEW
SON OF MATHEW, UNNAMTHUVEETTIL HOUSE,
POTHANIKKAD P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686672.
2024:KER:77264
3
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
5 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR)
ROSHEN D. ALEXANDER
T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
THIS CONTEMPT APPEALS (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
FINAL HEARING ON 01.10.2024, ALONG WITH
Con.APP(C).9/2024, 10/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT
ON 17.10.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:77264
4
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/ 25TH ASWINA, 1946
CON.APP(C) NO. 9 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2024 IN Con.Case(C) NO.299
OF 2024 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 10 TO 14:
1 FR. THOMAS PULAYATH
AGED 50 YEARS
PULAYATH HOUSE, AYAMPARA, KUNDUKAD P.O,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680028.
2 T.T.PATHROSE,
AGED 55 YEARS
THADIKKULANGARAYIL HOUSE, KARINKAYAM P.O,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678684.
3 BAIJU K.K
AGED 40 YEARS
KUZHIKATTIL HOUSE, MALLUCODE, ELAVAMPADAM P.O,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678684.
4 JOY
AGED 61 YEARS
APPATTUKUZHIYIL HOUSE, ELVAMPADAM P.O.,
KIZHAKENCHERY, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678684.
2024:KER:77264
5
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
5 K.C. PAULOSE
AGED 65 YEARS
KOLLARMALI HOUSE, ELAVAMPADAM P.O.,
KIZHAKKENCHERY, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678684.
BY ADVS.
SREENATH VIJAYARAGHAVAN
P.VIJAYARAGHAVAN ((PALAYIL)
P.V.ELIAS
S.M.PRASANTH
VISHNU SATHEESAN
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 11:
1 ST.THOMAS ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH CHERUKUNNAM,
(CHERUKUNNAM CHURCH)
ELAVAMPADAM P.O ALATHUR, ALATHUR TALUK,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 684, REPRESENTED BY ITS
VICAR FR. POLY VARGHESE, PIN - 678684.
2 FR.POLY VARGHESE,
AGED 54 YEARS,
THELAPPILLIL HOUSE, SOUTH KORATTY P.O.,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680308.
3 DR VENU V., IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
4 T K JOSE IAS (CORRECTED)
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS ADDITIONAL CHIEF
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF HOME,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
5 SHEIKH DARVESH SHAHIB
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
OF POLICE AND STATE POLICE CHIEF, POLICE HEAD
QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
2024:KER:77264
6
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
6 DR S CHITRA IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678001.
7 R ANAND IPS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT POLICE
CHIEF DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678001.
8 DR AMRITHAVALLI P
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE SUB DIVISIONAL
MAGISTRATE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD, PIN - 679101.
9 ASHOKAN R
PRESENTLY OFFICIATED AS THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ALATHUR P.O, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678541.
0 SHABEER S
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR
OF POLICE, (SHO) MANGALAM DAM POLICE STATION,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678683.
11 RAMANKUTTTY K
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS VILLAGE OFFICER
KIZHAKKENCHERY-II VILLAGE, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678541.
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
ROSHEN D. ALEXANDER
T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
THIS CONTEMPT APPEALS (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
FINAL HEARING ON 01.10.2024, ALONG WITH Con.APP(C).8/2024
AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 17.10.2024 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:77264
7
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/ 25TH ASWINA, 1946
CON.APP(C) NO. 10 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2024 IN Con.Case(C) NO.329
OF 2024 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPOINDENTS 10 TO 12:
1 FR RAJU MARKOSE
AGED 57 YEARS
S/O. MARKOSE, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, OLIMKADAVU P.O,
MANGALAMDAM, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678706.
2 THANKACHAN M.A
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O. LATE ABRAHAM, MANIELIL HOUSE,
NELLIYAMKUNNU, ALATHUR, P.O, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678541.
3 SHAJU MARKOSE,
AGED 52 YEARS
S/O. MARKOSE, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, OLIMKADAVU P.O,
MANGALAMDAM, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678706.
BY ADVS.
SREENATH VIJAYARAGHAVAN
P.VIJAYARAGHAVAN ((PALAYIL)
P.V.ELIAS
S.M.PRASANTH
2024:KER:77264
8
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 8:
1 ST. MARY'S ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH, MANGALAM DAM
POST,
MANGALAM DAM VILLAGE, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD
DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICAR FR. MATHAI
PANAMKUTTIYIL, PIN - 678706.
2 2. FR. MATHAI PANAMKUTTIYIL,
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O. P.M PURAVATH, VICAR, ST. MARYS ORTHODOX
SYRIAN CHURCH, MANGALAM DAM, RESIDING AT
PANAMKUTTIYIL HOUSE, VADAKKENCHERRY, PALAKKAD
DISTRICT, PIN - 683678.
3 FR. SAM VARGHESE,
AGED 51 YEARS
ASSISTANT VICAR, ST. MARYS ORTHODOX SYRIAN
CHURCH, MANGALAM DAM, RESIDING AT ORTHODOX
BISHOPS HOUSE, GEDSEEMON ARAMANA, MANNUTHY,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680651.
4 DR VENU V IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
5 T K JOSE IAS
(CORRECTED) PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS ADDITIONAL
CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF
HOME, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
6 SHEIKH DARVESH SHAHIB
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
OF POLICE AND STATE POLICE CHIEF, POLICE HEAD
QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
7 DR S CHITRA IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PALAKKAD - 678001.
2024:KER:77264
9
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
8 R ANAND IPS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT POLICE
CHIEF DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678001.
9 DR AMRITHAVALLI P.,
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE SUB DIVISIONAL
MAGISTRATE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD, PIN - 679101.
0 ASHOKAN R
PRESENTLY OFFICIATED AS THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ALATHUR P.O, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678541.
11 SHABEER S
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR
OF POLICE, (SHO) MANGALAM DAM POLICE STATION,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678683.
12 FR VARGHESE PALATHINKAL
AGED 47 YEARS
S/O KURIAKOSE, PALATHIKAL HOUSE, KAIRADY P.O.
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678510.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
ROSHEN D. ALEXANDER
T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
THIS CONTEMPT APPEALS (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
FINAL HEARING ON 01.10.2024, ALONG WITH Con.APP(C).8/2024
AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 17.10.2024 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:77264
10
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/ 25TH ASWINA, 1946
CON.APP(C) NO. 11 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2024 IN Con.Case(C) NO.1824
OF 2023 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/10TH RESPONDENT:
JIBI M. BABY
AGED 47 YEARS
MENOTH MALIL HOUSE, IRINGOLE, PERUMBAVOOR
VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 683545.
BY ADVS.
SAJI VARGHESE KAKKATTUMATTATHIL
AMALENDU A.
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 9, 11 TO 15:
1 ST. MARY'S ORTHODOX CHURCH (ODAKKALI PALLI)
ODAKKALI P.O, ARAKKAPADY VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU
TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS
DIOCESAN METROPOLITAN REV. FR. GEORGE
PATALATTU, PIN - 683447.
2024:KER:77264
11
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
2 REV. FR. GEORGE PATALATTU
VICAR APPOINTED BY THE DIOCESAN METROPOLITAN
ST. MARY'S ORTHODOX CHURCH, ODAKKALI, RESIDING
AT PATALATTU HOUSE, WEST VENGOLA POST, VENGOLA
KARA, ARAKKAPPADY, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683547.
3 DR. V. VENU IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
STATE OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
4 SHEIKH DARVESH SAHIB
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE STATE POLICE
CHIEF, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
KERALA, PIN CODE, PIN - 695010.
5 NEERAJ KUMAR GUPTA IPS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
OF POLICE, CENTRAL ZONE, ERNAKULAM RANGE,
PIN - 682031.
6 N.S. K. UMESH KUMAR IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM
DIST, KERALA, PIN - 682030.
7 VIVEK KUMAR IPS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT POLICE
CHIEF, ERNAKULAM RURAL, OFFICE OF DISTRICT
POLICE CHIEF, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DIST, KERALA,
PIN - 683101.
8 JUVVANAPUDI MAHESH IPS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE/ASSISTANT
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PERUMBAVOOR,
PIN - 683542.
2024:KER:77264
12
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
9 PRADEEPMON VARGHESE
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL
OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DIST, KERALA,
PIN - 683373.
10 SAJEEV M K
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR
OF POLICE, (SHO) KURUPPAMPADY POLICE STATION,
KURUPPAMPADY (P.O), ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683545.
11 FR. JOBY VARGHESE
S/O. VARGHESE, URAPPAI HOUSE, PUNNORPPADI
BHAGAM, MULAVOOR, THRIKKALATHOOR KARA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686673.
12 E.G. GEORGEKUTTY
EDAKUDY HOUSE, METHALA KARA, METHALA P.O,
ASAMANOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683545.
13 MAR THOMAS DIONYSINE
RESIDING AT PARTRIARKIS CENTRE, PUTHENCRUZ
VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM, PIN -
682308.
14 ROY VARGHESE
S/O. VARGHESE, MENOTHMALIL HOUSE, ODAKKALI
KARA, ASAMANOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683549.
15 BASIL M. ELDHOSE
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O. M.P. ELDHOSE, MUKALATH HOUSE, ODAKALY,
PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683549.
16 PAUL VARGHESE
AGED 66 YEARS
S/O. VARGHESE, PRESIDENT, JACOBITE ALMAYA
FORUM, REG. NO. 112/IV/16, RESIDING AT
KURUVICHARANGARA HOUSE, PATTIMATTOM. P. O.,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683562.
2024:KER:77264
13
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
BY ADVS.
S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
ROSHEN D. ALEXANDER
ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
TINA ALEX THOMAS
HARIMOHAN
THIS CONTEMPT APPEALS (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
FINAL HEARING ON 01.10.2024, ALONG WITH Con.APP(C).8/2024
AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 17.10.2024 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:77264
14
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/ 25TH ASWINA, 1946
CON.APP(C) NO. 12 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2024 IN Con.Case(C) NO.330
OF 2024 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/ RESPONDENTS 9 TO 11:
1 FR.ANI JOHN
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O LATE VJ KURIAKOSE, (WRONGLY SHOWN AS S/O
LATE JOHN IN THE CONTEMPT CASE), VAINNILATHIL
HOUSE, MANNAMANGALAM PO, THRISSUR,
PIN - 680014.
2 T.C.GEEVARGHESE,
AGED 78 YEARS,
S/O CHACKO, THANNIKOT HOUSE, VENGASSERY,
KORANCHIRA POST, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678684.
3 ABRAHAM SCARIA
AGED 64 YEARS
S/O SCARIA, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, PATTAYAMPADAM,
KORANCHIRA PO, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678684.
BY ADVS.
SAJAN VARGHEESE K.
LIJU. M.P
2024:KER:77264
15
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 8:
1 ST.MARY'S ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH
ERICKINCHIRA, (ERICKINCHIRA CHURCH), KORENCHIRA
POST, KIZAKKENCHERRY-I VILLAGE, ALATHUR TALUK,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICAR
FR.MATHAI THOZHUTHUNGAL, PIN - 678684.
2 FR. MATHAI THOZHUTHUNGAL
AGED 70 YEARS
S/O LATE KURIAKOSE, VICAR, ST.MARY'S ORTHODOX
SYRIAN CHURCH, ERICKINCHIRA, (ERICKINCHIRA
CHURCH), RESIDING AT THOZHUTHUNGAL HOUSE,
MUDAPALLUR PO, KADAMCODU, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678705.
3 DR. VENU V
IAS, PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CHIEF
SECRETARY, STATE OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
4 BISWANATH SINHA
IAS, PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE ADDITIONAL
CHIEF SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, DEPARTMENT OF
HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
5 SHEIKH DARVESH SAHIB
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
OF POLICE AND STATE POLICE CHIEF, STATE OF
KERALA, POLICE HEADQUARTERS,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
6 DR. CHITHRA
IAS, PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678001.
7 R. AANAD
IPS, PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT
POLICE CHIEF, DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678001.
2024:KER:77264
16
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
8 DR. AMRUTHAVALLI P
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE SUB DIVISIONAL
MAGISTRATE & REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 679101.
9 CR SANTHOSH
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALATHUR, ALATHUR
POST, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678541.
0 BENNY KP
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR
OF POLICE (SHO), VADAKKANCHERY POLICE STATION,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678683.
BY ADVS.
S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
ROSHEN D. ALEXANDER
SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS CONTEMPT APPEALS (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
FINAL HEARING ON 01.10.2024, ALONG WITH Con.APP(C).8/2024
AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 17.10.2024 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:77264
17
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/ 25TH ASWINA, 1946
CON.APP(C) NO. 13 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2024 IN Con.Case(C) NO.1803
OF 2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 10 TO 12:
1 V. P. MARKOSE
AGED 71 YEARS
S/O. PATHROSE, VAZHAKKUZHITHADATHIL,
KADAKKANADU P.O., KOLENCHERY, PIN - 682311.
2 ABRAHAM THOMAS
AGED 68 YEARS
S/O. THOMAS, THOTTAMATTATHIL HOUSE, NORTH
MAZHUVANNOOR P.O., VALAMBOOR, PIN - 686669.
3 THAMBI ABRAHAM
AGED 64 YEARS
S/O. ABRAHAM, IRATTEL HOUSE, EZHIPPRAM,
KADAYIRUPPU P.O., PIN - 682311.
BY ADVS.
SAJI VARGHESE KAKKATTUMATTATHIL
AMALENDU A.
2024:KER:77264
18
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 9:
1 REV. FR. TIJO KURIAKOSE
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O P. K. SCARIAH, VICAR, ST. THOMAS ORTHODOX
SYRIAN CHURCH, MAZHUVANNOOR, PIN - 686669.
2 GEORGE KURUVILLA
AGED 74 YEARS
S/O KURUVILLA, RESIDING AT KULANGATTIL HOUSE,
KADAKKANADU P.O, KOLENCHERY, ERNAKULAM DIST,
KERALA, PIN - 682311.
3 ELDOW K. JOSEPH
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O. JOSEPH, RESIDING AT KALARIKKATHADATHIL
HOUSE, KADAKKANADU P.O, KOLENCHERY, ERNAKULAM
DIST, KERALA, PIN - 682311.
4 N.S.K.UMESH KUMAR
IAS, PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM
DIST, KERALA, PIN - 682030.
5 VIVEK KUMAR
IPS, PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT
POLICE CHIEF, ERNAKULAM RURAL, OFFICE OF
DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DIST,
KERALA, PIN - 683101.
6 PRADEEPMON VARGHESE
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL
OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DIST., KERALA,
PIN - 686661.
7 SUDHEESH V. P
STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUNNATHUNADU POLICE
STATION, PATTIMATTOM P.O., ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 683562.
2024:KER:77264
19
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
8 FR. ELDHOSE MOLEKUDIYIL
AGED 53 YEARS
MOLEKUDIYIL HOUSE, MANARI P.O., PIN - 686673.
9 FR. JAISON KAVUMA
PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, VENGOOR P.O, PIN - 683546.
0 FR. ELDHOSE V.K
AGED 39 YEARS
VELLARINGAL HOUSE, PONJASSERY P.O, PERUMBAVOOR,
PIN - 683547.
11 FR. ELDHOSE NEDUNGOTTIL
AGED 54 YEARS
NEDUNGOTTIL HOUSE, THURUTHIPLY,
VALAYANCHIRANGARA P.O, PIN - 683556.
12 FR. JOHN JOSEPH
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O. FR. JOSEPH, PATHICKAL HOUSE, PERUMBAVOOR,
PIN - 683542.
BY ADVS.
S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
ROSHEN D. ALEXANDER
TINA ALEX THOMAS
HARIMOHAN
KOCHURANI JAMES
THIS CONTEMPT APPEALS (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
FINAL HEARING ON 01.10.2024, ALONG WITH Con.APP(C).8/2024
AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 17.10.2024 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:77264
20
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/ 25TH ASWINA, 1946
CON.APP(C) NO. 14 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2024 IN Con.Case(C) NO.1824
OF 2023 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 8:
1 DR. V. VENU IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
STATE OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695010.
2 SHEIKH DARVESH SAHIB
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE STATE POLICE
CHIEF, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANATHAPURAM,
PIN - 695010.
3 NEERAJ KUMAR GUPTA IPS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
OF POLICE, CENTRAL ZONE, ERNAKULAM RANGE,
PIN - 682031.
4 N.S.K. UMESH KUMAR IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682030.
2024:KER:77264
21
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
5 VIVEK KUMAR IPS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT POLICE
CHIEF, ERNAKULAM RURAL, OFFICE OF DISTRICT
POLICE CHIEF, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683101.
6 JUVVANAPUDI MAHESH IPS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE/ASSISTANT
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE , OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PERUMBAVOOR,
PIN - 683542.
7 PRADEEPMON VARGHESE
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL
OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DIST., KERALA,
PIN - 683373.
8 SAJEEV M.K.
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR
OF POLICE, (SHO) KURUPPAMPADY POLICE STATION,
KURUPPAMPADY (P.O.), ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683545.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 9 TO 15:
1 ST.MARY'S ORTHODOX CHURCH, (ODAKKALI PALLI)
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIOCESAN METROPOLITAN REV.
FR. GEORGE PATALATTU
ODAKKALI P.O., ARAKKAPADY VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU
TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683547.
2 REV. FR. GEORGE PATALATTU, VICAR APPOINTED THE
DIOCESAN METROPOLITAN ST. MARY'S ORTHODOZ
CHURCH, ODAKKALI,
RESIDING AT PATALATTU HOUSE, WEST VENGOLA POST,
VENGOLA KARA, ARAKKAPPADAY, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683547.
2024:KER:77264
22
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
3 FR. JOBY VARGHESE
S/O VARGHESE, URAPPAI HOUSE, PUNNORPPADI
BHAGAM, MULAVOOR, THRIKKALATHOOR KARA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686673.
4 JIBI M. BABY
S/O BENNY, MENOTH MALIL HOUSE, IRINGOLE,
PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683545.
5 E.G. GEORGEKUTTY
EDAKUDY HOUSE, METHALA KARA, METHALA P.O.,
ASAMANOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683545.
6 MAR THOMAS DIONYSINE
RESIDING AT PARTRIARKIS CENTRE, PUTHENCRUZ
VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682308.
7 ROY VARGHESE
S/O VARGHESE, MENOTHMALIL HOUSE, ODAKKALI KARA,
ASAMANOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683549.
8 BASIL M. ELDHOSE
AGED 39 YEARS, S/O M.P. ELDHOSE, MUKALATH
HOUSE, ODAKALY, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM- 683549.
9 PAUL VARGHESE
AGED 66 YEARS, S/O VARGHESE, PRESIDENT,
JACOBITE ALMAYA FORUM, REG. NO. 112/IV/16,
RESIDING AT KURUVICHARANGARA HOUSE, PATTIMATTOM
P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683562.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
ROSHEN D. ALEXANDER
THIS CONTEMPT APPEALS (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
FINAL HEARING ON 03.10.2024, ALONG WITH Con.APP(C).8/2024
AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 17.10.2024 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:77264
23
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/ 25TH ASWINA, 1946
CON.APP(C) NO. 15 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2024 IN Con.Case(C) NO.330
OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 8:
1 DR. VENU.V IAS
CHIEF SECRETARY,STATE OF KERALA,GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
2 BISHWANATH SINHA IAS
OFFICIATING AS THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY,
HOME DEPARTMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN
- 695001.
3 SHEIKH DARVESH SAHIB,
OFFICIATING AS THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
AND STATE POLICE CHIEF,STATE OF KERALA POLICE
HEAD QUARTERS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
4 DR.S CHITHRA IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001.
2024:KER:77264
24
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
5 R.ANAND IPS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT POLICE
CHIEF,DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE,PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678001.
6 DR.AMRUTHAVALLI.P
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE SUB DIVISIONAL
MAGISTRATE & REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,OTTAPPALAM,PALAKKAD,
PIN - 679101.
7 C.R.SANTHOSH
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALATHUR P.O.
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678541.
8 BENNY K.P
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR
OF POLICE,(SHO),VADAKKANCHERRY POLICE
STATION,PALAKKAD, PIN - 678683.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 9 TO 11:
1 ST.MARY'S ORTHODOX CHURCH, ERIKINCHIRA
ST.MARY'S ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH,ERIKKINCIRA,
KORENCHIRA POST, KIZHAKKENCHERRY-1
VILLAGE,ALATHUR TALUK,PALAKKAD, PIN - 678684.
2 FR.MATHAI THOZHUTHUNGAL,
AGED 70 YEARS
VICAR, ST.MARY'S ORTHODOX SYRIAN
CHURCH,ERIKKINCHIRA, RESIDING AT THOZHUTHUNGAL
HOUSE, MUDAPALLUR P.O. KADAMCODU,PALAKKAD.
3 ANI JOHN
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O LATE JOHN VAINNILATHIL HOUSE, MANNAMANGALAM
P.O.THRISSUR, PIN - 680014.
2024:KER:77264
25
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
4 T.C.GEEVARGHESE
AGED 78 YEARS
THANNIKOT HOUSE,VENGASERY, KORANCHIRA P.O.
PALAKKAD., PIN - 678684.
5 ABRAHAM SCARIA
S/O SCARIA, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, PATTAYAMPADAM,
KORANCHIRA P.O. PALAKKAD, PIN - 678684.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
SRI.ROSHEN D. ALEXANDER
THIS CONTEMPT APPEALS (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
FINAL HEARING ON 04.10.2024, ALONG WITH Con.APP(C).8/2024
AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 17.10.2024 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:77264
26
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/ 25TH ASWINA, 1946
CON.APP(C) NO. 16 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2024 IN Con.Case(C) NO.329
OF 2024 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 8:
1 DR. VENU V. IAS,
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
STATE OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
2 BISHWANATH SINHA IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF
SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME
AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
3 SHEIKH DARVESH SAHIB
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
OF POLICE AND STATE POLICE CHIEF, STATE OF
KERALA POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, ,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
4 DR. S. CHITHRA IAS,
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678001.
2024:KER:77264
27
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
5 R. ANAND IPS,
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT POLICE
CHIEF, DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678001.
6 DR. AMRUTHAVALLI P.
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE SUB DIVISIONAL
MAGISTRATE & REVENUE DIVSIONAL OFFICER, REVENUE
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 679101.
7 C.R. SANTHOSH
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALATHUR, ALATHUR P.O,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678541.
8 SHABEER, S
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR
OF POLICE, (SHO), MANGALAM DAM POLICE STATION,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678706.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 9 TO 12:
1 ST. MARY'S ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH
MANGALAM DAM POST, MANGALAM DAM VILLAGE,
ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED
BY ITS VICAR FR. MATHAI PANAMKUTTIYIL,
PIN-678706.
2 FR. MATHAI PANAMKUTTIYIL
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O P.M. PURAVATH, VICAR, ST. MARY'S ORTHODOX
SYRIAN CHURCH, MANGALAM DAM, RESIDING AT
PANAMKUTTIYIL HOUSE, VADAKKENCHERRY, PALAKKAD
DISTRICT, PIN - 683678.
2024:KER:77264
28
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
3 FR. SAM VARGHESE
AGED 51 YEARS
ASSISTANT VICAR, ST. MARY'S ORTHODOX SYRIAN
CHURCH, MANGALAM DAM, RESIDING AT ORTHODOX
BISHOPS HOUSE, GEDSEEMON ARAMANA, MANNUTHY,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680651.
4 FR. VARGHESE PALATHINKAL,
AGED 47 YEARS
S/O KURIAKOSE, PALATHINKAL HOSUE, KAIRADY P.O,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678510.
5 FR. RAJU MARKOSE
AGED 57 YEARS
S/O MARKOSE, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, OLIMKADAVU P.O,
MANGALAM DAM, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678706.
6 THANKACHAN M.A.
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O LATE ABRAHAM, MANTELTI HOUSE,
NELIIYAMKUNNU, ALATHUR P.O, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678541.
7 SHAJU MARKOSE,
AGED 52 YEARS
AGED 52 YEARS, S/O MARKOSE, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE,
OLIMKADAVU P.O, MANGALAMDAM, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678706.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR)
ROSHEN D. ALEXANDER
SREENATH VIJAYARAGHAVAN
AKHILA C.
P.VIJAYARAGHAVAN
S.M.PRASANTH
THIS CONTEMPT APPEALS (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
FINAL HEARING ON 04.10.2024, ALONG WITH Con.APP(C).8/2024
AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 17.10.2024 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:77264
29
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/ 25TH ASWINA, 1946
CON.APP(C) NO. 17 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2024 IN Con.Case(C)
NO.299 OF 2024 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 9:
1 DR. VENU V. IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
STATE OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
2 BISHWANTH SINHA IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF
SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME
AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
3 SHEIKH DARVESH SAHIB
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
OF POLICE AND STATE POLICE CHIEF, STATE OF
KERALA, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
4 DR. S. CHITHRA IAS,
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678001.
2024:KER:77264
30
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
5 R. ANAND IPS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT POLICE
CHIEF, DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678001.
6 DR. AMRUTHVALLI P.
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE SUB DIVISIONAL
MAGISTRATE & REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 679181.
7 ASHOKAN R
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALATHUR, ALATHUR
P.O., PALAKKAD, PIN - 678541.
8 SHABEER S
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR
OF POLICE, (SHO), MANGALAM DAM POLICE STATION,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678683.
9 RAMANKUTTY. K
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
KIZHAKKENCHERY-II VILLAGE, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678541.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 10 TO 15:
1 ST. THOMAS ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH, CHERUKUNNAM
(CHERUKUNNAM CHURCH)
CHERUKUNNAM (CHERUKUNNAM CHURCH), ELAVAMPADAM
P.O., ALATHUR, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD
DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICAR FR. POLY
VARGHESE, PIN - 678684.
2024:KER:77264
31
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
2 FR. POLY VARGHESE, VICAR
AGED 54 YEARS
ST. MARY'S ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH, CHERUKUNNAM,
S/O LATE VARGHESE, THELAPPILLIL HOUSE, SOUTH
KORATTY P.O., THRISSUR, PIN - 680308.
3 FR. THOMAS PULAYATH
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O KURIAN, PULAYATH HOUSE, AYAMPARA, KUNDUKAD
P.O., THRISSUR, PIN - 680028.
4 T.T. PATHROSE
AGED 55 YEARS
S/O THOMAS, THADIKKULANGARAYIL HOUSE, KARINKYAM
P.O., PALAKKAD, PIN - 678706.
5 BAIJU K.K
AGED 40 YEARS, S/O KURUVILA, KUZHIKATTIL HOUSE,
MALLUCODE, ELAVAMPADAM P.O., PALAKKAD - 678684.
6 JOY
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O ULAHANNAN, APPATTUKUZHIYIL HOUSE,
ELAVAMPADAM P.O., KIZHAKENCHERY, PALAKKAD, PIN
- 678684.
7 K.C. PAULOSE,
AGED 65 YEARS
S/O CHACKO, KOLLARMALI HOUSE, ELAVAMPADAM P.O.,
KIZHAKKENCHERY, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678684.
8 N.M. MATHEW, AGED 75 YEARS
S/O MATHAI, PUTHENPURA HOUSE, EVAVAMPADAM P.O.,
VAKKALA, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678706.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR)
ROSHEN D. ALEXANDER
SREENATH VIJAYARAGHAVAN
AKHILA C.
P.VIJAYARAGHAVAN ((PALAYIL)
S.M.PRASANTH
2024:KER:77264
32
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
THIS CONTEMPT APPEALS (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
FINAL HEARING ON 04.10.2024, ALONG WITH Con.APP(C).8/2024
AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 17.10.2024 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:77264
33
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/ 25TH ASWINA, 1946
CON.APP(C) NO. 18 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2024 IN Con.Case(C) NO.1803
OF 2023 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4:
1 N.S.K UMESH KUMAR IAS
PRESENTLY OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE,KAKKANAD,ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682030.
2 VIVEK KUMAR IPS
OFFICIATING AS THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
ERNAKULAM RURAL,OFFICE OF DISTRICT POLICE
CHIEF,ALUVA,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683101.
3 PRADEEPMON VARGHESE
OFFICIATING AS THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686661.
4 SUDHEESH V.P.
STATION HOUSE OFFICER,KUNNATHUNADU POLICE
STATION, PATTIMATTOM P.O.,ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 683562.
BY ADVS.
T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
2024:KER:77264
34
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 5 TO 12:
1 REV.FR.TIJO KURIAKOSE
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O P. K. SCARIAH, VICAR,ST.THOMAS ORTHODOX
SYRIAN CHURCH,MAZHUVANNUR. PERMANENTLY RESIDING
AT MANALEL PUTHIYAPARAMPIL HOUSE, AMAYANOORP.O.
KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686019.
2 GEORGE KURUVILLA,
AGED 74 YEARS
S/O KURUVILLA,RESIDING AT KULANGATTIL
HOUSE,KADAKKANADU.P.O.,KOLENCHERY,ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682311.
3 ELDOW K JOSEPH
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O. JOSEPH, RESIDING AT KALARIKKATHADATHIL
HOUSE, KADAKKANADU P.O. KOLENCHERY,ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682311.
4 FR. ELDHOSE MOLEKUDIYIL
AGED 53 YEARS
MOLEKUDIYIL HOUSE,MANARI P.O., PIN - 686673.
5 FR.JAISON KAVUMA
AGED 30 YEARS
PUTHUSSERY HOUSE , VENGOOR P.O., PIN - 683546.
6 FR.ELDHOSE V.K.
AGED 39 YEARS
VELLARINGAL HOUSE,PONJASSERY P.O. PERUMBAVOOR,
PIN - 683547.
7 ELDHOSE NEDUNGOTTIL
AGED 54 YEARS
NEDUNGOTTIL HOUSE,THURUTHIPLY,VLAYANCHIRANGARA
P.O.683 556, PIN - 683556.
8 FR JOHN JOSEPH
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O FR.JOSEPH,PATHICKAL HOUSE,PERUMBAVOOR,
PIN - 683542.
2024:KER:77264
35
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
9 V.P.MARKOSE
AGED 71 YEARS
S/O PATHROSE,VAZHAKKUZHITHADATHIL,KADKKANADU
P.O.,KOLENCHERRY, PIN - 682311.
0 ABRAHAM THOMAS
AGED 68 YEARS
S/O THOMAS, THOTTAMATTATHIL HOUSE,NORTH
MAZHUVANNOOR P.O. VALAMBOOR, PIN - 686669.
11 THAMBI ABRAHAM
AGED 64 YEARS
S/O ABRAHAM,IRATTEL HOUSE,
EZHIPPRAM,KADAYIRUPPU P.O., PIN - 682311.
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
SRI.ROSHEN D. ALEXANDER
THIS CONTEMPT APPEALS (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
FINAL HEARING ON 09.10.2024, ALONG WITH Con.APP(C).8/2024
AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 17.10.2024 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:77264
36
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/ 25TH ASWINA, 1946
CON.APP(C) NO. 19 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2024 IN Con.Case(C) NO.1761
OF 2023 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT & ADDL.7TH RESPONDENT:
1 SHIBIN K.A.
INSPECTOR OF POLICE,POTHANIKKAD POLICE STATION,
MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686671.
2 N.S.K. UMESH
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPOINDENTS 2 TO 6:
1 REV.FR.C.K.ISSAC COR EPISCOPA
AGED 79 YEARS
S/O KURIAKOSE, VICAR,ST.JOHN'S BESPHAGE
ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH, RESIDING AT
CHENAYAPPILLIL HOUSE,
PARAMBENCHERY,PULINTHANAM,POTHANIKADU,
MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686671.
2024:KER:77264
37
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
2 REV.FR.P.V.PHILIP ,
AGED 74 YEARS
S/O POTHEN, ASSISTANT VICAR,ST.JOHN'S BESPHAGE
ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH,RESIDING AT
ARIMAPANCHIRAYIL HOUSE, PULINTHANAM P.O.
POTHANIKADU, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 686671.
3 FR. K.K.MATHEWS
KUZHUVELIPPURAM HOUSE,PALLARIMANGALAM,P.O.
POTHANIKKAD, PIN - 686671.
4 NOBY SCARIA
CHENAYAPPILLIL HOUSE, KADAVOOR P.O., KADAVOOR,
PIN - 686671.
5 ELDHOSE VARGHESE
PUTHUSSERIL HOUSE,PARAMBANCHERI, PULINTHANAM
P.O. POTHANIKADU, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM, PIN
- 686671.
6 BASIL MATHEW
S/O MATHEW, UNNAMTHUMVEETIL HOUSE,POTHANIKKAD
P.O.,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686671.
7 BABU JOHN
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O JOHN, VELLAKKALLEL,PULINTHANAM,P.O.
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686671.
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
SRI.ROSHEN D. ALEXANDER
THIS CONTEMPT APPEALS (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
FINAL HEARING ON 09.10.2024, ALONG WITH Con.APP(C).8/2024
AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 17.10.2024 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:77264
38
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
ANIL K. NARENDRAN & P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JJ.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14,
15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of October, 2024
JUDGMENT
P.G.Ajithkumar, J.
These appeals under Section 19(1) of the Contempt of
Courts Act, 1971 arose on a common order dated 30.08.2024,
which is interlocutory in nature, in Con.Cases (C) Nos.1761 of
2023, 1803 of 2023, 1824 of 2023, 299 of 2024, 329 of 2024
and 330 of 2024. These appeals were heard on different
dates, namely, 01.10.2024, 03.10.2024, 04.10.2024,
07.10.2024 and 09.10.2024.
2. The learned Single Judge as per the impugned
order issued the following directions:
"Accordingly, the following directions are issued:-
(i) The District Collector, Ernakulam is suo motu impleaded
as the additional respondent in COC(C) No.1761 of 2023.
The learned Government Pleader takes notice for the
additional respondent.
(ii) The District Collector, Ernakulam shall takeover
possession of the St.Mary's Orthodox Church, Odakkali,
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
St.John's Besphage Orthodox Syrian Church, Pulinthanam
and St.Thomas Orthodox Syrian Church, Mazhuvannoor.
(iii) The District Collector, Palakkad shall takeover
possession of the St.Mary's Orthodox Church, Mangalam
Dam, St.Mary's Orthodox Syrian Church, Erickinchira and
St.Thomas Orthodox Syrian Church, Cherukunnam.
(iv) The District Collectors shall file reports regarding
takeover before this Court by the next posting date.
(v) The District Police Chiefs, Ernakulam and Palakkad shall
deploy sufficient police personnel to aid the District
Collectors."
3. The writ petitions were filed seeking direction to
the Inspectors of Police in the respective police stations and
also other officials to prevent the appellants in Con.App.(C)
Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of 2024 and their men from
violating the law as declared by the Apex Court in
K.S.Varghese v. St.Peters' and Paul's Syrian Orthodox
Church [(2017) 15 SCC 333] and ensure that the writ
petitioners, Priests, Vicars, Diocesan Metropolitan, Malankara
Metropolitan, etc. are not prevented from conducting religious
services in accordance with the 1934 Constitution of the
Malankara Orthodox Church (for short "1934 Constitution").
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
4. The writ petitions were allowed by issuing similar
directions. The Inspector of Police concerned were directed to
render necessary assistance to the writ petitioners, Priests,
Vicars, Diocesan Metropolitan, Malankara Metropolitan, etc. to
peacefully enter the respective Churches in accordance with
1934 Constitution and to conduct the religious services
without let or hindrance from the party respondents in the
writ petition. A time limit was also fixed. Alleging that the said
directions were not complied with within time or yet, the writ
petitioners filed the instant contempt of court cases.
5. The learned Single Judge gave various directions to
ensure compliance of the judgments in the writ petitions. But
the directions remained unenforced. It is seen that the official
respondents resorted to a convenient excuse that an attempt
by the writ petitioners to enter the Churches with police help
would be thwarted by the appellants along with a posse of
their men. The learned Additional Advocate General took a
stand that such an attempt would lead the law and order into
dangerous proportions and even result in loss of human lives.
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
After considering the submissions and taking into account the
facts and circumstances, which are borne out from the
materials on record, the learned Single Judge thought it fit to
direct the District Collectors concerned to take over
possession of the respective Churches. Aggrieved thereby the
party respondents in the respective Contempt of Courts cases
filed Con.Appeals (C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of 2024.
The official respondents filed Con.Appeals (C) Nos. 14, 15, 16,
17, 18 and 19 of 2024.
6. On 25.09.2024, this Court granted interim stay for
a period of 10 days, which has been extended for a further
period of two weeks. The learned Senior Counsel appearing
for the party respondents initially raised a contention
regarding maintainability of the appeals. However, when this
matter was taken up for hearing on 01.10.2024, the learned
Senior Counsel submitted that he was not pursuing that
contention, and hence we do not propose to consider the
question of maintainability of the appeals.
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
7. Heard the learned Senior Advocate Sri.K.
Ramakumar appeared on instructions, for the appellants in
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9 and 10 of 2024, the learned counsel for
the appellants Sri.Saji Varghese and Sri. Sajan Varghese in
Con.App.(C) No.11, 12 and 13 of 2024, the learned Additional
Advocate General for the appellants in Con.Appeals (C) Nos.
14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024 and the official respondents
in the other appeals and the learned Senior Advocate Sri. S.
Sreekumar appeared on instructions for the party respondents
who filed writ petitions. Service of notice in other respondents
was dispensed with.
8. The learned Senior Advocate Sri.K.Ramakumar
raised the following contentions to assail the order of the
learned Single Judge. The directions of the Apex Court in
K.S.Varghese v. Peter's and Paul's Syrian Orthodox
Church [(2017) 15 SCC 333] do not enable to dissuade or
avoid any parishioner from the Church. On the other hand,
the directions only enable every parishioner and believer to
enter the Church and offer prayers, and therefore, there can
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
be no action for taking over possession of the Churches and
entrusting with one faction. It is further submitted that there
is no averment or allegation in the contempt petitions
concerning any wilful disobedience by the appellants enabling
this Court to invoke the contempt of court jurisdiction and to
have an enquiry as provided in Section 17 of the Contempt of
Courts Act.
9. The learned Single Judge impleaded the District
Collectors of Ernakulam and Palakkad Districts and gave
them directions to take over possession of the respective
Churches. Impleading as well as giving such directions are
unknown to the procedure provided under the Contempt of
Courts Act and beyond the powers of the Court. In the above
regard, the learned Senior Counsel cited the decision of a
Division Bench of this Court in Subramanian C. v. Nalini
M. [2024 KHC OnLine 1270] (One among us, Anil
K.Narendran, J. authored it). In the view of the learned
Senior Counsel, the empowerment of the Court is to convict
or not the contemnor, and not to travel beyond that and give
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
positive directions like taking over of possession, etc. Such a
course is ultra vires the provisions in the Contempt of Courts
Act. The petitioners did not specify whether the respondents
are guilty of civil contempt or criminal contempt. It is
accordingly submitted that the impugned order needs
interference.
10. Sri.Sajan Varghese, the learned counsel for the
appellants in Con.App.(C) No.12 of 2024 adopted the
submissions of the learned Senior Counsel Sri.K.Ramakumar.
He further brought to our attention the order of the learned
Single Judge dated 12.06.2024 in Cont.Case (C) No.1824 of
2023. In that order the official respondents were reminded of
the need to enforce the directions issued in the writ petition
and cautioned not to use any excessive or disproportionate
force, and not to cause breach of law and order.
11. The learned Additional Advocate General would
submit that the directions in the impugned orders are beyond
the contempt of court jurisdiction of this Court and hence the
said order is unsustainable in law. He supported the
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
arguments of the party appellants to reinforce the plea that
the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
12. Annexure A20 in Cont.Case (C) No.1761 of 2023 is
the decree passed by the Sub Judge, Muvattupuzha in
O.S.No.15 of 2016 terms of the directions contained in
K.S.Varghese [(2017) 15 SCC 333]. That decree allows
the writ petitioners to enter the Church and administer the
same in terms of the 1934 Constitution. An appeal was
preferred, but the same was dismissed. The review petition
filed against the judgment in the appeal was also dismissed.
The writ petitions were, however, filed independent of the said
decree. The writ petitions were allowed holding that State and
its instrumentalities are bound to see that the directions
contained in K.S.Varghese [(2017) 15 SCC 333] are
implemented and also the law laid down by the Apex Court in
St.Mary's Orthodox Church v. State Police Chief [(2020)
18 SCC 329].
13. The learned Senior Advocate Sri. S. Sreekumar
submitted that when concerted efforts were taken to thwart
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
enforcement of the judgment in question, this Court is obliged
to exercise its inherent power and ensure that the contemnors
are prevented from retaining the fruits of their contempt. The
learned Senior Counsel further would submit that it is
essential to direct the official respondents to ensure that the
contumacious conduct on the part of the contemnors does not
continue and no such contemnors shall be allowed to enjoy
the fruits of the contumacious act. It is submitted that this
Court is amply empowered to give positive directions so as to
avoid perpetuation of contumacious acts and impleading of
the parties for ensuring compliance of such directions is within
the powers of this Court.
14. In the writ petition, directions were sought to
ensure compliance of the directions of the Apex Court in
paragraph No. 184 of the judgment in K.S.Varghese
[(2017) 15 SCC 333]. The directions of the Apex Court in
St.Mary's Orthodox Church [(2020) 18 SCC 329], which
is relevant are extracted below:
"There cannot be any violation of the order by any one
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
concerned. Even the State Government cannot act
contrary to the judgment and the observations made by
this Court and has the duty to ensure that the judgment
of the court is implemented forthwith.
Any observation made by the High Court contrary to the
judgment passed by this Court stands diluted.
The State and all parties shall abide by the judgment
passed by this Court in totality and cannot solve the
matter in any manner different than the judgment
passed by this court. No parallel system can be
created."
15. The writ petitions were resisted by the appellants
setting forth every contention including that the directions
contained in paragraph No.184 of the judgment in
K.S.Varghese [(2017) 15 SCC 333] do not enable to
dissuade the parishioners or a faction of the believers from
the Church or from offering prayers in the Church. After
considering all such contentions only the writ petitions were
allowed by directing the respective Inspectors of Police to
render necessary assistance to the writ petitioners, Priests,
Vicars, Diocesan Metropolitan, Malankara Metropolitan, etc. to
peacefully enter the respective Churches in accordance with
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
the 1934 Constitution. It was also directed that they should
be allowed to conduct the religious services in the Churches
without let or hindrance from the contesting party
respondents, who are the appellants in Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9,
10, 11, 12 and 13 of 2024. The judgments in the writ
petitions were challenged by filing writ appeals, but without
any success. In such circumstances, the appellants cannot be
heard to contend that the directions issued in the writ
petitions are against the judgment in K.S.Varghese [(2017)
15 SCC 333] and hence unenforceable. The observation in
the appeal judgments that there would not be any bar for the
appellants to pursue other remedies, if available, is also not a
reason not to enforce the directions which have become final.
16. In Prithawi Nathram v. State of Jharkhand
[(2004) 7 SCC 261] the allegation in the contempt case was
that the direction issued by the learned Single Judge of Patna
High Court in the order dated 30.03.1999 was not complied
with. While dealing with the application for contempt, the
learned Single Judge passed a judgment holding that it would
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
not be proper to take any action for contempt. The learned
Single Judge proceeded to examine the correctness of the
order and called upon the parties to satisfy him that the
direction of the kind contained in the order dated 30.03.1999
could be passed. Later the learned Single Judge gave various
directions, the legality of which came up for consideration
before the Apex Court. The Apex Court held that if any party
is aggrieved by the order, which in his opinion is wrong or
against the rules, or its implementation is neither practicable
nor feasible, he should always either approach the court that
passed the order or invoke jurisdiction of the appellate court.
Rightness or wrongness of the order cannot be urged in
contempt proceedings. Right or wrong, the order has to be
obeyed. Flouting of an order of the court would render the
party liable for contempt. While dealing with an application for
contempt, the court cannot traverse beyond the order, non-
compliance with which is alleged. In order words, it cannot
say what should not have been done or what should have
been done. It cannot traverse beyond the order. It cannot test
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
the correctness or otherwise of the order or give additional
direction or delete any direction. That would be exercising
review jurisdiction while dealing with an application for
initiation or contempt proceedings. The same would be
impermissible and indefensible. Accordingly, the contention of
the appellants touching the correctness of the judgment in the
writ petition was held untenable. That fortifies our view that
the appellants are debarred from questioning correctness of
the judgments in the writ petitions.
17. It is trite that an action for civil contempt is
contemplated in cases where there is wilful disobedience of
any judgment, order, etc. The learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the appellants would submit that there is no
pleading in the petitions in the contempt cases that anyone
had wilfully disobeyed the judgments in question. We are
unable to accept the said contention. In the statement of facts
as well as grounds there are specific assertions that not only
the party respondents, but the official respondents also
wilfully disobeyed the directions contained in the judgment in
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
the writ petitions. The direction to the official respondents is
to render necessary assistance to the writ petitioners, Priests,
Vicars, Diocesan Metropolitan, Malankara Metropolitan, etc. to
peacefully enter the Churches concerned and to conduct
religious services without let or hindrance and the period for
accomplishing the said acts was fixed as two months. In the
contempt petitions, the attempts made by the official
respondents for implementing the said direction are
narrated. The very submission of the learned Additional
Advocate General is that despite repeated attempts, the said
direction could not be implemented for, the appellants along
with a posse of their men prevented. No further materials
are required to hold that the directions remain unenforced
and its cause is wilful disobedience on the part of the
appellants.
18. Whether the action sought is for a civil contempt
or a criminal contempt is another question posed by the
appellants. The reasons for which the appellants were to be
proceeded against for the contempt of court is disobedience
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
of the judgments in the writ petitions. "Civil contempt" is
defined in Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, which
reads,-
"(b) "civil contempt" means wilful disobedience to any
judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other
process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking
given to a court."
19. The contempt petitions were filed with specific
pleading and allegations that the contemnors have to be
punished for the disobedience of the judgments in question.
The Apex Court in State of U.P. v. Association of Retired
Supreme Court and High Courts Judges at Allahabad
[(2024) 3 SCC 1] (at paragraph 32) held that disobedience
of a judgment or order of the Court would amount only to civil
contempt. Therefore, there cannot be any doubt; the
contempt actions were initiated for the purpose of taking
action for a civil contempt.
20. Steps on a contempt case are controlled by the
provisions in the Contempt of Courts Act and the Rules made
thereunder. It is submitted that in order for facilitating the
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
High Courts to exercise its powers under Article 215 of the
Constitution of India, the Contempt of Courts Act was enacted
and the Rules were framed. Certainly, this Court is obliged to
follow the procedure in the Act and Rules for convicting a
contemnor. That does not, however, mean that inherent power
vested with a High Court is in any way limited or curtailed by
the provisions in the Act and the Rules in other matters,
particularly to ensure enforcement of its judgment and orders.
21. The learned Single Judge impleaded the District
Collector, Ernakulam and District Collector, Palakkad as
additional respondents and gave directions to them to take
over possession of the Churches in dispute. The learned
Senior Counsel and also the counsel appearing for the
appellants in the party appeals would submit that the said
course is totally incorrect and against the scheme of the
Contempt of Courts Act. The learned Senior Counsel has
invited our attention to the principles laid down by the Apex
Court in Prithawi Nathram [(2004) 7 SCC 261] and this
Court in Rajappan Nair v. Stephen Joseph [2005 (2) KLT
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
345] and Subramanian C. [2024 KHC OnLine 1270]. As
against the said contentions, the learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the party respondents places reliance on the
decisions of the Apex Court in Delhi Development
Authority v. Skipper Constructions Co.(P) Ltd. [(1996)
4 SCC 622] and Balwantbhai Somabhai Bhandari v.
Hiralal Somabhai Contractor (deceased) Rep.by LRs.
[AIR 2023 SC 4390] and a decision of the Calcutta High
Court in Derby Sales Pvt.Ltd. v. Sanjay Mitra, Chief
Secretary, Land & Land Reforms Department [2017 SCC
OnLine Cal.54]. The learned Senior Counsel also pointed out
an earlier instance where this Court resorted to a similar
recourse in Cont.Case (C) No.777 of 2020. That order was
upheld vide judgment dated 16.10.2020 in W.A.No.1046 of
2020 also.
22. In Rajappan Nair [2005 (2) KLT 345] a Division
Bench of this Court was dealing with a Contempt Appeal filed
under Section 19(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, against
the order dated 01.03.2005 of the learned Single Judge in
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
Cont. Case (C)No.1542 of 2004. The direction contained in the
judgment dated 31.03.2004 of the learned Single Judge in
W.P.(C)No.39412 of 2003 reads thus;
"The 2nd respondent will produce a copy of this
judgment before the Secretary to Government Co-
operative Department along with a copy of the writ
petition within a period of one month from today. In
case there is no interim order as of now against the
implementation of Ext.P2, the 2nd respondent will
implement Ext.P2 by reinstating the petitioner subject
to the result of the appeal."
23. The Division Bench disposed of W.A.No.880 of 2004
filed by the 2nd respondent Co-operative Society, by the
judgment dated 18.05.2004, stating as follows;
"Since the question of stay was not examined by the
learned Single Judge and the direction was issued
subject to the condition that there was no stay order
operating in favour of the appellant, we are clearly of
the view that it is open to the latter to approach the
appellate authority and ask for stay of the operation of
the order passed by the Registrar rescinding the
resolution terminating the services of the 1st
respondent. We therefore, dispose of this appeal with a
direction to the appellate authority to consider the
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
prayer for stay made by the appellant in accordance
with law after hearing the parties without being
influenced by any of the observations made by the
learned Single Judge."
24. The stay petition was later heard by the
Government and was rejected by the order dated 24.08.2004.
Since the direction of the learned single Judge was not
implemented, the respondent filed Cont. Case (Civil) No.1542
of 2004. Before the learned Single Judge, it was contended by
the appellant that in view of the judgment dated 18.05.2004
in W.A.No.880 of 2004, the direction given by the learned
Single Judge in the judgment dated 31.03.2004 in W.P.
(C)No.39412 of 2003 to reinstate the respondent in service,
subject to the result of the appeal pending before the
Government, did not survive and the same has merged in the
judgment of the Division Bench.
25. The learned Single Judge, however, gave a positive
direction to respondents No. 1 and 2 to reinstate the
petitioner in service within two days from the date of that
order. It was in that context, the appellant contended that
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
contempt court has exceeded its jurisdiction in issuing such a
positive direction. It was also contended that the appellant
was not given notice calling for his explanation or heard
before passing such an order. Further contention was that the
learned Single Judge was not justified in reaching a conclusion
that the court was misled by the appellant. On the other
hand, the respondent contended that there was deliberate
defiance of the orders passed by the learned Single Judge.
26. A reading of the order dated 01.03.2005 in Cont.
Case (Civil) No. 1542 of 2004, which is extracted below, make
it explicit the reason why the appellate Court interfered with
that order;
"However, in view of the stand taken by respondents 1 and 2
in the affidavit that the reinstatement is not made due to
lack of clarity regarding the direction, pending further orders
in the matter, it is only in the interests of justice and for
securing the ends of justice that a positive direction is
issued. Therefore, there will be a direction to respondents 1
and 2 to reinstate the writ petitioner, who is also the
petitioner herein, in service. The order reinstating the
petitioner shall be passed within two days from today and
the same shall be produced before this court on
04.03.2005."
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
27. After referring to the provisions under Rule 6 of the
Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules, which deals
with taking cognizance, and Rule 9, which deals with
preliminary hearing and notice, the Division Bench set aside
the direction given by the learned Single Judge. It was also
held that in a contempt case, the Court can only examine
whether the direction already given has been complied with or
not, and no positive direction can be given. By giving such a
positive direction, the learned Single Judge travelled beyond
the scope of the appellate judgment and created new rights
and obligations, which is impermissible in the exercise of
contempt of court jurisdiction. That legal position is well
settled by the decision of the Apex Court in Prithawi
Nathram [(2004) 7 SCC 261]. Under such circumstances,
in Rajappan Nair [2005 (2) KLT 345], the Division Bench
set aside the direction given by the learned Single Judge.
28. In Subramanian C. [2024 KHC OnLine 1270],
the contempt case was initiated with the allegation that the
sole respondent disobeyed the order of the Court. The
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
direction in the order was to that respondent. The learned
Single Judge, however, on 08.04.2024 passed an order
directing the additionally impleaded second respondent to
ensure compliance of the orders of the Court passed against
the original respondent and also the order passed by the
Educational Authorities. On the facts of that case, the Division
Bench held that such a fresh direction to the additionally
impleaded party cannot be given in a contempt of court
proceedings.
29. Position of law is thus clear. The provisions of the
Contempt of Courts Act do not provide a procedure for taking
any positive action anew beyond punishing the contemnor in
case of disobedience of a judgment, order, etc. of the court.
But the Apex Court held on multiple occasions that in a
contempt of court proceedings the court has powers to put
back the parties to the same position as they stood prior to
the order in question and that those who defy the order or
direction of the court should not be allowed to enjoy the fruits
of their defiance.
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
30. In Delhi Development Authority [(1996) 4 SCC
622] the Apex Court held in lucid terms that a contemnor
ought not to be permitted to enjoy and/or keep the fruits of
his contempt. In Mohommed Idris v. R.J. Babuji [1985
(1) S.C.R.598] the Apex Court held that undergoing the
punishment for contempt does not mean that the Court is not
entitled to give appropriate directions for remedying and
rectifying the things done in violation of its orders.
31. The following observations in Clarke v. Chadburn
[1985 (1) All.E.R. 211] make the principle eloquent:
"I need not cite authority for the proposition that it is of
high importance that orders of the court should be
obeyed. Willful disobedience to an order of the court is
punishable as a contempt of court, and I feel no doubt
that such disobedience may properly be described as
being illegal. If by such disobedience the persons
enjoined claim that they have validly effected some
charge in the rights and liabilities of others, I cannot see
why it should be said that although they are liable to
penalties for contempt of court for doing what they did,
nevertheless those acts were validly done. Of course, if
an act is done, it is not undone merely by pointing out
that it was done in breach in law. If a meeting is held in
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
breach of an injunction, it cannot be said that the
meeting has not been held. But the legal consequences
of what has been done in breach of the law may plainly
be very much affected by the illegality. It seems to me
on principle that those who defy a prohibition ought not
to be able to claim that the fruits of their defiance are
good, and not tainted by the illegality that produced
them."
32. Adhering to the proposition of law laid down in the
aforementioned decisions a Division Bench of the Calcutta
High Court in Derby Sales Pvt.Ltd. [2017 SCC OnLine
Cal.54] answered the question whether the Court should
stop by issuing a Rule or should pass further orders for
implementation of its order. One of the arguments was that
on a contempt application no substantive or consequential
orders could be passed. It was held that although the court
exercises special jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts
Act, the inherent power of the Court to do complete justice
between the parties is not abrogated or abridged. It is well-
settled that a contemnor ought not to be permitted to enjoy
and/or retain the fruits of his contempt.
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
33. In Balwantbhai Somabhai Bhandari [AIR 2023
SC 4390] one of the questions was could, in a contempt of
court proceedings, a transfer of the suit property pendente lite
can be declared to be void in order to maintain the majesty of
law? The Apex Court held at paragraph No. 116(iii) as follows;
"Although the transfer of the suit property pendente lite
may not be termed as void ab initio yet when the court is
looking into such transfers in contempt proceedings the
court can definitely declare such transactions to be void
in order to maintain the majesty of law. Apart from
punishing the contemnor, for his contumacious conduct,
the majesty of law may demand that appropriate
directions be issued by the court so that any advantage
secured as a result of such contumacious conduct is
completely nullified. This may include issue of directions
either for reversal of the transactions by declaring such
transactions to be void or passing appropriate directions
to the concerned authorities to ensure that the
contumacious conduct on the part of the contemnor does
not continue to enure to the advantage of the contemnor
or any one claiming under him." (underlines supplied)
34. In a similar instance of contempt action in
Cont.Case (C) No.777 of 2020 the learned Single Judge of this
Court on 29.07.2020 directed the District Collector to take
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
over the possession of the church, and further to hand over
the church to the petitioners. When that order was challenged
in appeal, the Division Bench as per the judgment dated
16.10.2020 in W.A.No.1046 of 2020 confirmed the order in
Cont.Case (C) No.777 of 2020.
35. Thus, the law appears to be well-settled. The court
has sufficient power to pass an order on a contempt
application for closing the breach. The court cannot and
should not rest by passing a punitive order against the
contemnor. It is the duty of the Court to see that its order is
implemented and the contemnor does not enjoy the benefits
he has derived by violating the court's order. If this is not
done, the entire process of law and justice shall become a
farce.
36. In view of what is stated above the conclusion is
irresistible. The learned Single Judge acted within the
contours of his jurisdiction alone while passing the impugned
order, by which District Collectors were impleaded and
directed to take over possession of the respective Churches.
2024:KER:77264
Con.App.(C) Nos.8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of 2024
We find no reason to hold the said order wrong or infirm.
These appeals therefore fail. The appeals are accordingly
dismissed.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE
Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE
dkr
