Shashindran.C vs P.B Nooh
2026 Latest Caselaw 1585 Ker

Kerala High Court

Shashindran.C vs P.B Nooh on 13 February, 2026

                                                            ​2026:KER:13354​
​Con. Case (C) No. 353 of 2026​          ​:​1​:​




                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM​
                 ​

                                     PRESENT​
                                     ​

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V​
         ​

                                        &​
                                        ​

                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. V. JAYAKUMAR​
                ​

                TH​
                ​
  FRIDAY, THE 13​
  ​                 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 24TH MAGHA, 1947​
                    ​

                           CON.CASE (C) NO. 353 OF 2026​
                           ​

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 04.12.2024 IN WP(C) NO.25604 OF​
​

                        2024 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA​
                        ​


PETITIONER:​
​

                   ​HASHINDRAN.C​
                   S
                   AGED 47 YEARS​
                   ​
                   S/O APPU, CHIRAKKAL HOUSE, VALILLAPUZHA P.O​
                   ​
                   AREECODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673639​
                   ​


                   BY ADV SRI.C.DINESH​
                   ​

RESPONDENTS:​

​

1​ ​ ​.B NOOH​ P AGE AND FATHER'S NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER MANAGING​ ​ DIRECTOR, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, JALABHAVAN,​ ​ VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN - 695033​ ​

2​ ​ ​MT. BEENA P.P​ S AGE AND FATHER'S NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER EXECUTIVE​ ​ ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, PROJECT DIVISION,​ ​ MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676505​ ​ ​2026:KER:13354​ ​Con. Case (C) No. 353 of 2026​ ​:​2​:​

​Y ADV SHRI.SUJITH MATHEW JOSE, ADDITIONAL STANDING​ B COUNSEL, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY​ ​

​HIS​ ​ T CONTEMPT​ ​ OF​ ​ COURT​ ​ CASE​ ​ (CIVIL)​ ​ HAVING​ ​ COME​ ​ UP​ ​ FOR​ ADMISSION​ ​ ​ ON​ ​ 13.02.2026,​ ​THE​ ​COURT​ ​ON​ ​ THE​ ​ SAME​ ​DAY​ DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:​ ​ ​2026:KER:13354​ ​Con. Case (C) No. 353 of 2026​ ​:​3​:​

​J U D G M E N T​

​Raja Vijayaraghavan V, J.​

​This​​Contempt​​Case​​is​​filed​​alleging​​violation​​of​​the​​directions​​issued​​by​​this​

​Court in the judgment dated 04.12.2024 in WP(C) No. 25604 of 2024.​

​2.​ ​We​ ​have​​heard​​the​​learned​​counsel​​appearing​​for​​the​​petitioner​​and​

​the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.​

​3.​ ​We​ ​find​ ​that​ ​the​ ​issue​ ​is​ ​in​ ​respect​ ​of​ ​the​ ​proposal​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Kerala​

​Water​​Authority​​for​​laying​​a​​pipeline​​in​​connection​​with​​the​​drinking​​water​​project​

​in Keezhuparambu Grama Panchayat.​

​4.​ ​It​ ​appears​ ​that​ ​the​ ​respondent​ ​Nos.​ ​7​ ​and​ ​8,​ ​who​ ​were​ ​the​ ​Kerala​

​Water​​Authority​​as​​well​​as​​the​​Executive​​Engineer,​​Kerala​​Water​​Authority,​​filed​​an​

​additional​ ​counter​ ​affidavit​ ​on​ ​02.12.2024,​ ​and​ ​this​ ​Court​ ​proceeded​ ​to​ ​extract​

​paragraph​ ​Nos.​ ​5​ ​and​ ​6​ ​of​ ​the​ ​additional​ ​counter​ ​affidavit.​ ​After​ ​extracting​ ​the​

​same,​​this​​Court​​had​​passed​​the​​following​​directions​​in​​paragraph​​Nos.​​7​​and​​8​​of​

​the judgment, which reads as under:​

"​ 7.​ ​The​ ​learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​the​ ​petitioner​ ​would​ ​submit​​that​​in​​view​​of​​the​​alternative​​route​​proposed​​by​​the​ ​Kerala​ ​Water​ ​Authority,​ ​the​ ​grievance​ ​of​ ​the​ ​petitioner​ ​stands redressed.​

I​ n​ ​such​ ​circumstances,​ ​this​ ​writ​ ​petition​ ​is​ ​disposed​ ​of,​ ​taking​ ​note​ ​of​ ​the​ ​aforesaid​ ​submission​ ​made​ ​by​ ​the​ ​2026:KER:13354​ ​Con. Case (C) No. 353 of 2026​ ​:​4​:​

l​earned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​the​ ​petitioner;​ ​however,​​making​​it​​clear​ ​that​​this​​Court​​has​​not​​expressed​​anything​​as​​to​​the​​legality​ ​or​ ​otherwise​ ​of​ ​the​ ​decision​ ​taken​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Kerala​ ​Water​ ​Authority​ ​to​ ​draw​ ​the​​pipeline​​through​​an​​alternative​​route,​ ​avoiding​ ​the​ ​Devaswom​ ​land​ ​of​ ​Sree​ ​Thrikkalayoor​ ​Mahadeva Temple."​

​5.​ ​The​ ​learned​ ​counsel​ ​appearing​ ​for​ ​the​ ​petitioner​ ​submitted​ ​that​

​the​ ​respondent​ ​Nos.​ ​7​ ​and​ ​8​ ​have​ ​violated​ ​the​ ​undertaking​ ​given​ ​before​ ​the​

​Court,​​and​​therefore,​​they​​are​​to​​be​​proceeded​​against​​under​​the​​Contempt​​of​

​Courts Act, 1971.​

​6.​ ​We​ ​have​ ​heard​ ​the​ ​learned​ ​counsel​ ​appearing​ ​for​ ​the​

​respondents.​

​7.​ ​We​ ​find​ ​that​ ​this​ ​Court,​ ​after​ ​extracting​ ​the​ ​contentions​ ​of​ ​the​

​petitioner​ ​and​ ​the​ ​respondents,​ ​had​ ​only​ ​recorded​ ​the​ ​submission​ ​of​ ​the​

​learned​ ​counsel​ ​appearing​ ​for​ ​the​ ​petitioner​ ​that,​ ​in​ ​view​ ​of​ ​the​ ​alternative​

​route​ ​proposed​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Kerala​ ​Water​ ​Authority,​ ​the​ ​grievance​ ​of​ ​the​ ​petitioner​

​stands​ ​redressed.​ ​This​ ​Court​ ​had​ ​also​ ​made​ ​it​ ​clear​ ​that​ ​the​ ​Court​ ​has​ ​not​

​expressed​​anything​​as​​to​​the​​legality​​or​​otherwise​​of​​the​​decision​​taken​​by​​the​

​Kerala​ ​Water​ ​Authority​ ​to​ ​draw​ ​the​ ​pipeline​ ​through​ ​an​ ​alternative​ ​route,​

​avoiding the Devaswom land of Sree Thrikkalayoor Mahadeva Temple.​ ​2026:KER:13354​ ​Con. Case (C) No. 353 of 2026​ ​:​5​:​

​8.​ ​It​ ​cannot,​ ​therefore,​ ​be​ ​said​ ​that​ ​this​ ​Court​ ​had​ ​issued​ ​binding​

​directions​ ​to​ ​the​ ​respondents,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​same​ ​have​ ​been​ ​violated.​ ​No​ ​case​ ​of​

​contempt is made out.​

​This​ ​Contempt​ ​Case​ ​is​ ​closed,​ ​reserving​ ​the​ ​right​ ​of​ ​the​ ​petitioner​ ​to​

​exhaust his remedies in accordance with law, if so advised.​

​ d/-​ S ​RAJA​​VIJAYARAGHAVAN V,​ ​JUDGE​

​ d/-​ S ​K.V. JAYAKUMAR,​ ​JUDGE​ ​APM​ ​2026:KER:13354​ ​Con. Case (C) No. 353 of 2026​ ​:​6​:​

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) NO. 353 OF 2026​ ​

PETITIONER ANNEXURES​ ​

Annexure A​ ​ ​ERTIFIED​ ​ C COPY​ ​OF​ ​THE​ ​ JUDGMENT​ DATED​ ​ 04.12.2024 IN WP(C) NO.25604 OF 2024​ ​