Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

P.I.BABU, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.ITHACK versus R.K.ABROT, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


P.I.BABU, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.ITHACK v. R.K.ABROT, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT - Con Case(C) No. 1328 of 2007(S) [2007] RD-KL 17408 (17 September 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Con Case(C) No. 1328 of 2007(S)

1. P.I.BABU, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.ITHACK,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. R.K.ABROT, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT
... Respondent

2. R.VENKATESWARAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME

For Petitioner :SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN

For Respondent :S.C. FOR SYNDICATE BANK-M.P.ASHOK KUMAR

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

Dated :17/09/2007

O R D E R

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

Cont.Case (C)No.1328 of 2007

Dated, this the 17th day of September, 2007



JUDGMENT

H.L.Dattu, C.J. A dismissed employee of the respondent Bank is before us in this contempt petition, inter alia, alleging that the respondents have disobeyed the orders and directions issued by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1766 of 2002 dated 26th July, 2005. Therefore, a request is made in the contempt petition to initiate appropriate contempt proceedings against the respondents and punish them for their wilful and deliberate disobedience of the orders and directions issued by this Court in the aforesaid writ appeal. (2) The Bank aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in O.P.No.13836 of 1997 has filed appeal before this Court in W.A.No.1766 of 2002. A Bench of this Court by its order dated 26th July, 2005 has modified the orders passed by the learned Single Judge. In that they have stated as under:

"2. It is contended that there is no violation of principles of natural justice. But in the light of conviction and sentence, necessarily he has to face further dismissal from service and it is only appropriate that the dismissal already ordered be converted as a dismissal based on such conviction; and ofcourse in case the appeal against conviction is modified or annulled, the Bank will be free to initiate further action either as directed by the learned single Judge or in terms of clause 11 of the Syndicate Officer Bank Employees (discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976." (3) A perusal of the orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court would clearly demonstrate that there is no positive direction by this Court to the respondent Bank to pay arrears of salary to the complainant for the period from 1996 till he was convicted by a criminal court in the year 1999. In the absence Cont.Case (C)No.1328/2007 2 of a positive direction by this Court, it cannot be said that the Bank has committed any contempt which would come within the definition of Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. (4) In view of the above, we do not intend to entertain this contempt petition. Accordingly, the petition requires to be rejected and it is rejected without reference to the respondent. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.T.SANKARAN)

JUDGE

vns


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.