High Court Kerala High Court

T.N.Krishnan Nair vs Smt.Niveditha P.Haran I.A.S on 23 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
T.N.Krishnan Nair vs Smt.Niveditha P.Haran I.A.S on 23 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Con.Case(C).No. 340 of 2010(S)


1. T.N.KRISHNAN NAIR,S/O.NEELAKANDA PILLAI,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. PRABHAKARA KURUP,S/O.KUNHU PILLAI, AGED

                        Vs



1. SMT.NIVEDITHA P.HARAN I.A.S,(HUSBAND'S
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SMT.P.V.ASHA

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR

 Dated :23/03/2010

 O R D E R
                       C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

             - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
            Cont. Case (Civil)No. 340 OF 2010
                                       in
                    W.P(C)No. 1327 of 2010
             - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
           Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2010

                           J U D G M E N T

As per Annexure – A1 judgment in WP(c) No.

1327/2010 a direction was issued to consider the claim of the

petitioner for temporary promotion under 31(a) (i) of the

General Rules in the Kerala State and Subordinate Services

Rules and also in terms of Ext.P6. The said direction was

issued taking into account the fact that the petitioners are due

to retire from service on 31.3.2010. It is alleging non-

compliance with the direction issued in the said judgment

dated 15.2.2010 that this contempt case has been filed. The

learned Government Pleader made available a copy

of Government Order (G.O.(Rt) No.1237/2010/RD dated

17.3.2010) when the matter is taken up for admission. It

would reveal that it is in compliance with the direction in the

judgment dated 15.2.2010 that Government have issued the

said order. It would again reveal that after such consideration

the claims of the petitioners have been rejected for the reason

CCC No.340 of 2010
: 2 :

that the seniority list pertaining to the category to which the

petitioners belong, has not so far been finalized. There is a

short delay in considering the claims of the petitioners in

terms of the judgment dated 15.2.2010. But, the aforesaid

order would make it clear that the claims of the petitioners

have been considered. In that view of the matter, the

judgment dated 15.2.2010 ha been complied with. Hence,

this contempt case is closed. It is made clear that in case the

petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 17.3.2010, they

will be at liberty to challenge the same in appropriate

proceedings.

Sd/-

(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)

jma

// true copy//

P.A. To Judge