Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

LIJIN.G.S., S/O.GOPINATHA PILLAI versus SHRI.K.AHAMMED KUTTY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


LIJIN.G.S., S/O.GOPINATHA PILLAI v. SHRI.K.AHAMMED KUTTY - Con Case(C) No. 1608 of 2006(S) [2007] RD-KL 15768 (16 August 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Con Case(C) No. 1608 of 2006(S)

1. LIJIN.G.S., S/O.GOPINATHA PILLAI,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. SHRI.K.AHAMMED KUTTY,
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR

For Respondent :SRI.M.M.ABDUL AZIZ (SR.)

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :16/08/2007

O R D E R

H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN, J.

Contempt Case (Civil) No. 1608 of 2006-S

Dated this the 16th day of August, 2007.



J U D G M E N T

H.L.Dattu, C.J. This court, while disposing of W.P.(C).No.17560 of 2005 by its order

dated 2nd February, 2006 had issued the following directions:



i). The 3rd respondent is directed to revert the 4th respondent to the post of HSST in S.S.Higher Secondary School, Moorkanad. ii). The 3rd respondent will initiate selection process for the selection and appointment of a regular Principal in S.S.Higher Secondary School, Moorkanad and finalise the selection and appointment, within four months of his receiving a copy of this judgment. Iii). Till selection process is completed and regular Principal is selected and appointed, the 3rd respondent is directed to appoint the petitioner as Principal in charge (as Adhoc Principal) for S.S.Higher Secondary School, Moorkanad on the basis of Exts.P1 and P2 G.O. This he will do at the earliest and at any rate within one month of his receiving a copy of this judgment. Parties shall suffer their respective costs." (2). Sri.M.M.Abdul Aziz, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnor would submit that the respondent has complied with the orders and directions issued by this court. (3). We do not doubt the correctness or otherwise the statement made by the learned counsel. Accordingly, for the present, we drop this contempt COC.1608 of 2006 2 proceedings. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.T.SANKARAN)

JUDGE

MS


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.