Kerala High Court
Lt.Gen Sukhdeep Sangwan vs Bijukumar.S on 27 June, 2025
W.A.No.1467 of 2025 1 2025:KER:46284
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.
TH
FRIDAY, THE 27
DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 6TH ASHADHA, 1947
WA NO. 1467 OF 2025
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05.12.2023 IN CON.CASE(C)
NO.2459 OF 2019 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS IN
A
CON.CASE(CIVIL):
1
T.GEN SUKHDEEP SANGWAN,
L
AGED 64 YEARS
S/O LATE AMRIT SINGH DIRECTOR GENERAL (FORMER),
ASSAM RIFLES, SHILLONG, MEGHALAYA, PIN - 793010
2
IEUTENANT GENERAL PRADEEPCHANDRAN NAIR
L
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O CHANDRAN NAIR C, THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
(PRESENT), ASSAM RIFLES, SHILLONG, PIN - 793011
3
IEUTENANT GENERAL, VIKAS LAKHERA
L
AGED 56 YEARS
S/O.SHRI VISHNU PRASAD LAKHERA, DIRECTOR GENERAL
(FORMER), ASSAM RIFLES, SHILLONG, MEGHALAYA,
PIN - 793011
Y ADVS.
B
SHRI.C.DINESH, SENIOR PANEL COUNSEL
SHRI.SUVIN R.MENON, SENIOR PANEL COUNSEL
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS:
1
BIJUKUMAR.S
W.A.No.1467 of 2025 2 2025:KER:46284
GED 50 YEARS
A
S/O. SIVADASAN PILLAI, DEVANANDANAM, KALPPADA,
MARUTHOOR VIA, KALLAYAM P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 695304
2
NNIKRISHNAN K. V,
U
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O. VISWAMBHARAN, KULIKKANNA PARAMBIL HOUSE,
AROOR P O, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,KERALA,
PIN - 691523
3
ARIKRISHNAN K G
H
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O. GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, HARINIVAS, IMALI EAST,
OMALLOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, KERALA,
PIN - 689647
4
ASANT KUMAR P
V
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O. MADHAVAN NAIR, KOMENTHODUKAYIL HOUSE,
KARINGHAMANNA,THAMARASSERY P O, KOZHIKODE
DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 673573
5
JITHKUMAR C
A
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O.CHELLAPPAN ACHARI, LAKSHMI BHAVAN,
KARITHAKKAM, BEACH P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 695007
THIS
WRIT
APPEAL
HAVING
BEEN
FINALLY
HEARD
ON
24.06.2025,
THE COURT ON 27.06.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.1467 of 2025 3 2025:KER:46284
JUDGMENT
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J.
This appeal has been filed with a delay of 450 days.
Havingperusedthereasonsstatedintheaffidavitfiledinsupport
of the application to condone delay, we are satisfied that
sufficient cause has been made out to condone the delay.
Hence, C.MAppln.No.2 of 2025 to condone the delayis allowed.
2. Heard on the question of admission.
3. The present intra court appeal under Section 5 of the
Kerala High Court Act, 1958, assails the interim order dated
05.12.2023 passed in Contempt Case(C)No.2459 of 2019,
whereby the learned Single Judge had granted time to comply
with the judgment dated 05.06.2015passedinW.P(C)No.24735
of 2013.
4. The writ petition was filed by the respondents herein
seeking parity in the pay scale as in the case of their
counterparts in other paramilitary forces. The writ petition was
disposedofonthegroundthattheissueinvolvedisnolongerres
integra in view of the law laid down by the Division Bench of
Gauhati High Court in W.A.No.50(SH) /2010, which judgment
W.A.No.1467 of 2025 4 2025:KER:46284
was rendered following the binding precedentinUnionofIndia
v. Dineshan K.K.[(2008) 1 SCC 586].
5. The learned counsel for the appellants contended that
thelearnedSingleJudgeapartfromgrantingtimetocomplywith
thejudgmenthadissuedcertainnewdirections;ie,toimplement
the judgment in the light of Annexure V and Annexure VI.
Therefore, being aggrieved, the present writ appeal has been
filed.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the
respondentsvehementlyopposedtheaforeprayerandsubmitted
that the writ appeal against an interim order that too in a
Contempt Petition is not maintainable, since the same doesnot
finally decide the fate of the Contempt Petition. He further
submittedthatitisawellsettledlegalpositionthatwritappealis
not maintainable against an interim orderwheretheissueisnot
decided finally. The learned counsel for the respondents also
submitted that the Gauhati High Court judgment; ie,
W.A.No.50(SH)/2010 has been disposed of applying the
judgment in the case of Dineshan K.K. (Supra) and as per
AnnexuresVandVIwhicharethedocumentswhereinDineshan
W.A.No.1467 of 2025 5 2025:KER:46284
K.K.(Supra)andothershaveextendedthebenefit.Inviewofthe
aforesaid, the learned Single Judge has not passed any fresh
orders exercising his jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India. Instead he has granted further time to
comply with the judgment dated 05.06.2015 passed in
W.P(C)No.24735 of 2013, failing which the2ndappellantherein
shall appear in person and show cause why action shall not be
taken for flouting the directions issued by this Court.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the
learned counsel appearing for the respondentsandperusedthe
records.
8.Onperusaloftheimpugnedinterimorder,itisseenthat
no further directions have been issued; rather, the interim order
only directs compliance with the decision in Dineshan K.K.
(supra).Assuch,itcannotbesaidthatthelearnedSingleJudge
hasexercisedhispowersunderArticle226oftheConstitutionof
India; rather, the powers appear to have been exercised under
the Contempt of Courts Act. Accordingly, the learned Single
Judge has not committed any error in the impugned order.
W.A.No.1467 of 2025 6 2025:KER:46284
Hence, we are of the considered opinion that no
interference is called for in the writ appeal. The present writ
appealisdismissedasnotmaintainableagainsttheinterimorder
passed in the contempt petition.
Sd/-
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
JUDGE
d/-
S
SYAM KUMAR V.M.
JUDGE
MC/26.6
W.A.No.1467 of 2025 7 2025:KER:46284
APPENDIX OF WA 1467/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1
RUE
T COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
17.01.2025
IN
CM
APPL
NO.
1/2025
IN
CON. APP (C) 1 OF 2025
Annexure A2
CERTIFIED
COPY OF
THE
JUDGMENT
DATED
03.03.2025 IN CON. APP (C) 1 OF 2025
