Kerala High Court
All India Gref Ex-Servicemen Welfare ... vs Dr. Niten Chandra, Ias on 20 November, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
2024:KER:87110
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 29TH KARTHIKA,
1946
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1931 OF 2024
JUDGMENT DATED 01.08.2023
ARISING FROM : WP(C)21156/2023
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WP(C):
ALL INDIA GREF EX-SERVICEMEN WELFARE
ASSOCIATION,
ALL INDIA GREF EX-SERVICEMEN WELFARE
ASSOCIATION, 14/876 (9), FIRST FLOOR,
G.K TOWER, NEAR STADIUM BUS STAND, PALAKKAD,
KERALA - 678 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT RAJU MATHEW,
S/O P A MATHEW, CHALAKUZHI AVENUE,
KALLEKKAD P O, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678006.
BY ADVS. R.PRADEEP KUMAR
U.BALAGANGADHARAN
RESPONDENT/4TH RESPONDENT IN WP(C):
DR. NITEN CHANDRA, IAS,
AGED AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER
THE SECRETARY DEPT OF EX SERVICEMEN WELFARE
GOVT. OF INDIA, SOUTH BLOCK,
NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001.
BY ADV KRISHNA T C
SMT.MINI GOPINATH, CGC
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP
FOR ADMISSION ON 20.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:87110
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1931 OF 2024
-2-
JUDGMENT
Smt.Mini Gopinath - learned Central Government Counsel for the respondent, submits that the directions in the judgment could not be complied with because the relevant and germane documents had not been produced by the petitioner.
2. Sri.R.Pradeep Kumar - learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that the relevant document is on record as Annexure A5.
3. Smt.Mini Gopinath responded, saying that, if the petitioner maintains that Annexure A5 is the only relevant document, then the directions in the judgment will be complied with, adverting to the same. She sought four 2024:KER:87110 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1931 OF 2024 -3- months time for doing so.
In the afore circumstances, this contempt case is closed, recording the undertaking of Smt.Mini Gopinath, on behalf of the respondent, that Ext.P7 representation of the petitioner will be disposed of in terms of the directions in the judgment, adverting to Annexure A5; and that final orders will be issued not later than four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
After I dictated this part of the judgment, Smt.Mini Gopinath intervened to submit that, though the petitioner asserts that Annexure A5 is the only relevant document, it may be otherwise. She, therefore, sought liberty for her client to ask the petitioner to produce any other document, if found warranted.
2024:KER:87110 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1931 OF 2024 -4- In response to the above, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that his client will answer any such requisition. This is recorded.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
akv JUDGE
2024:KER:87110
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1931 OF 2024 -5- APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1931/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.[C] NO. 21156/2023 DATED 1.8.2023 ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 04.01.2024 IN RP 1215/2023 ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF MEETING DATED 13.2.2024 ANNEXURE A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.04.2024 ANNEXURE A5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.
EDP/PHP/7TH CPC/CIVIL REVISION/2024 DATED 04.03.2024 ISSUED BY SR.ACCOUNTS OFFICER [ P ] TO HEADQUARTERS, DTE GENERAL BORDER ROADS