IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Con.Case(C).No. 1359 of 2008(S)
1. EBRAHIM EBRAHIM MAMMU, THERUVATHU HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SHRI.D.D.INGTE, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME
... Respondent
2. SHRI.SYED MOHAMMED, AGE AND FATHER'S
For Petitioner :SRI.P.A.AUGUSTIAN
For Respondent :SRI.JOHN VARGHESE,SC,CEN.BOARD OF EXCIS
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
Dated :18/11/2008
O R D E R
H.L. DATTU, C.J. & A.K. BASHEER, J.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
C.C.C. No. 1359 of 2008
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Dated this the 18th day of November, 2008.
Judgment
H.L. Dattu, C. J:
Appellant in W.A.No.182/2008 is the complainant in this Contempt
Petition.
2. In the Contempt Petition filed, the complainant alleges that the
respondents have disobeyed the directions issued by this Court at paragraph
9 of the order and therefore requests us to initiate appropriate contempt
proceedings against the respondents for their wilful and deliberate
disobedience of the orders and directions issued by this Court.
3. This Court while disposing of the WA.182/2008 by its order dated
5th February 2008, at paragraph 9 had stated as under:
“Taking into consideration all these aspects
of the matter, in our opinion, for the present,
we need not grant the reliefs sought by the
appellant/petitioner. However, we make it
clear that the respondent shall complete the
investigation and enquiry and pass final
orders as expeditiously as possible, at any
rate within three months from today, if the
petitioner co-operates with the Department.
The appellant/petitioner is permitted to have
the assistance of the learned counsel when he
participates in the enquiry proceedings that
CCC.1359/2008. 2
may be held by the respondent as directed by
us”
4. A perusal of the directions issued by this Court would clearly
indicate that the respondent shall complete the investigation and the enquiry
and pass final orders within an outer limit of three months from the date of
the order, provided the appellant co-operates with the Department.
5. The second respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit. In
paragraph 2 of the affidavit it is stated that though several summons/
notices were issued to the appellant to participate in the investigation and
also in the enquiry, the appellant did not choose to appear before him and
therefore there is neither wilful nor delilberate disobedience of the orders
and directions issued by this Court.
6. We have carefully perused the orders passed by us while disposing
of WA.No.182/2008 and also the counter affidavit filed by the respondent.
In our opinion, the respondents have done whatever that is possible in their
hands to get the co-operation of the appellant and to comply with the orders
and directions issued by this Court. Since the appellant had not co-operated
with the respondents, they have not completed the investigation and enquiry
and also not passed final orders as directed by this Court. If anybody has to
CCC.1359/2008. 3
be blamed, it is only the appellant and he cannot blame the respondents for
not complying with the orders and directions issued by this Court. In that
view of the matter, we decline to take cognizance of this Contempt Petition.
7. Accordingly the Contempt Petition is closed.
Ordered accordingly.
H.L. DATTU
Chief Justice
A.K. BASHEER
Judge
an.