Contempt of Court Case (Civil) Nos. 1725/2018 & 43/2019, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam

Cont.Case C).Nos.1725/18 & 43/19 1 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 7TH MAGHA, 1942 Con.Case(C).No.1725 OF 2018 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 1700/2012(J)** ## **PETITIONERS:** |**1**|**ASHA P GOPINATH,**| |---|---| ||**AGED 39 YEARS,W/O.DR.MANOJ P.G.,POIKAPARAMBIL**| ||**HOUSE, BHOODANAM P.O, NILAMBUR,MALAPPURAM-**| ||**679334.**| |**2**|**MANOJ C,**| ||**AGED 32 YEARS**| ||**S/O.BHASKARAN C.V, CHETTIAVALAPPIL HOUSE,**| ||**PADIYOOR P.O, KANNUR-670703.**| |**3**|**RENJITH A.S,**| ||**AGED 36 YEARS**| ||**S/O.SASIDHARAN K.K,ANIKKATTU HOUSE, VADAKARA**| ||**P.O, THALYOLAPARAMBU,KOTTAYAM-686605.**| **BY ADVS. KALEESWARAM RAJ SRI.VARUN C.VIJAY KUM.A.ARUNA SMT.MAITREYI SACHIDANANDA HEGDE SMT.RIYA RAYMOL IYPE SMT.K.C.AISHWARYA** Cont.Case C).Nos.1725/18 & 43/19 2 ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 SANJAY M KAUL IAS, AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695001** **2 DR.K.ELLANGOVAN IAS FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES,SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ADDL R2 IS IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DTD 6/8/19 IN IA 1/19 IN COC 1725/18** **3 SHRI.K.T.JAYARAJAN FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,KERALA STATE TEXTILE CORPORATION,ANNAPOORNA,TC9/2000,KOCHAR ROAD,SASTHAMANGALAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010 ADDL R4 IS IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DTD 30/9/2020 IN IA 1/2020 IN COC 1725/18** **R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER R3 BY ADV. P.U.SHAILAJAN** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **GP BIJOY CHANDRAN** **THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27.01.2021, ALONG WITH Con.Case(C).43/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** Cont.Case C).Nos.1725/18 & 43/19 3 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 7TH MAGHA, 1942 Con.Case(C).No.43 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 4352/2012 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 4352/2012(T)** ## **PETITIONER:** **MOHAMMED NISTHAR M.A. S/O ABDUL LATIF,AGED 35 YEARS,MANALATHVALAPPIL HOUSE,PERUMPILAVU,THRISSUR,NOW AT MILLENNIUM ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES,P.O.BOX NO.38806,ABU DHABI-UAE,PRESENTLY AT ENG.AHMED AL MAZROUEI TRADING L.L.C,AL YAYF STREET,BUILDING NO.4,P.O.BOX 4644,ABU DHABI,UNITED ARAB EMIRATES** **BY ADVS. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ SRI.VARUN C.VIJAY KUM.A.ARUNA KUM.THULASI K. RAJ** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 DR.K.ELLANGOVAN I.A.S FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES,SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695001** Cont.Case C).Nos.1725/18 & 43/19 4 - **2 SHRI.A.V.RAJAN** **FATHER'S NAME AND AGE ARE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,MANAGING DIRECTOR,KERALA STATE TEXTILE COR PORATION,'ANNAPOORNA',TC9/200001,KOCHAR** **ROAD,SASTHAMANGALAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010 NAME OF R2 IS REPLACED WITH SHRI.M.GANESH AS PER ORDER DTD 22/2/19 IN IA 1/19 IN COC 43/19** - **3 SHRI K.SUDHIR** - **FATHER'S NAME AND AGE ARE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,MANAGING DIRECTOR,KERALA STATE TEXTILE CORPORATION,ANNAPOORNA TC9/2000,KOCHAR ROAD,SASTHAMANGALAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** - **4 SHRI.K.T.JAYARAJAN** - **FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,KERALA STATE TEXTILE CORPORATION,ANNAPOORNA,TC9/2000,KOCHAR ROAD,SASTHAMANGALAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010 ADDL R4 IS IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DTD 30/9/2020 IN IA 1/2020 IN COC 43/19** - **R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.U.SHAILAJAN R4 BY ADV. P.U.SHAILAJAN** **THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27.01.2021, ALONG WITH Con.Case(C).1725/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** Cont.Case C).Nos.1725/18 & 43/19 5 ## **ANU SIVARAMAN, J.** **= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =** **Contempt of Court (C).Nos.1725 of 2018 & 43 of 2019** **= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 27th day of January, 2021** ## **JUDGMENT** 1.These contempt of court cases are filed alleging violation of the undertaking given before this Court, which was recorded in the common judgment dated 4.4.2017. The writ petitions had been filed challenging the decision taken by the Government to cancel the selection conducted for appointment to several posts in public sector undertakings under the State Government. The selections had been conducted as authorised by the Government by an order dated 1.1.2011. By an order dated 2.12.2011, the State had decided to cancel the selections and the said order was under challenge. - 2.An affidavit was filed in the writ petitions by the Government stating that the Government proposes to go on with the appointment on the basis of the recruitment made in Cont.Case C).Nos.1725/18 & 43/19 6 pursuance of the Government Order dated 1.1.2011 to the vacancies sanctioned following the procedure for recruitment. The said submission was recorded and the writ petitions were closed on 4.4.2017. These contempt of court cases were filed alleging that in spite of the submissions made before this Court, the Government had refused to act upon the same and recruitment process had not been restarted. 3.An affidavit had been placed on record by the 1[st] respondent, Secretary to the Government in the Industries Department. It was stated that a Government Order had been issued on 27.3.2018 in compliance with the submissions made before this Court and in cancellation of the Government Order dated 2.12.2011. It is stated that clauses 2 and 4 of G.O. dated 2.12.2011 were not withdrawn, so as to maintain the status quo in respect of 44 posts, which were entrusted to the Kerala Public Service Commission. With regard to the posts which were not within the purview of the Public Service Commission, it was stated that the Government had directed the Kerala State Textiles Corporation (KSTC for short) to go ahead with Cont.Case C).Nos.1725/18 & 43/19 7 the appointment process as per the ranked list prepared, subject to the availability of vacancies. It was, therefore contended that the undertaking given before this Court had been complied with. 4.The Managing Director, KSTC was thereafter impleaded as party and affidavits have been placed on record. It is submitted that the 3[rd] petitioner in COC.No.1725/2018, who was included in the ranked list of Junior Manager (Accounts) had been issued with an appointment order. As far as respondents 1 and 2 in COC.No.1725/2018 and the petitioner in COC.No.43/2019 are concerned, it is submitted that the petitioners were included in the ranked list of Junior Manager (Marketing) in the Textile Corporation and had earlier been issued with appointment orders on the understanding that there were vacancies to accommodate them in the new mills at Uduma, Pinarayi and Komalapuram. It is stated that it was intended to start the commercial operation of mills at Uduma, Pinarayi and Komalapuram in the year 2011. But the mills were not started due to various reasons. It is stated that the Cont.Case C).Nos.1725/18 & 43/19 8 Komalapuram mill started commercial operation on 1.6.2016 and Uduma mill started functioning on 29.10.2018 and Pinarayi mill started functioning on 28.2.2019. However, it is submitted that due to the delay in starting production, a revised project report was submitted by the Kerala State Textiles Corporation before the Government and the post of Junior Manager (Marketing) was abolished and no appointment could therefore be made from the ranked list to the post which is no longer in existence. Additional affidavits have also been placed on record, pointing out the absence of vacancy in the post of Junior Manager (Marketing) in the KSTC. There is no post available to accommodate the petitioners and that the appointment therefore could not be effectuated. 5.The learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, submits that even in case there is no vacancy to accommodate the petitioners, in view of the fact that appointment orders had been issued to the petitioners, the provision of Rule 7 of Part II KS & SSR are liable to be followed in a case of this nature and Cont.Case C).Nos.1725/18 & 43/19 9 the petitioners are liable to notional appointments and to be granted a preferential right to future vacancies. Reliance is placed on a decision of the Apex Court in **Raj Singh v. State of Haryana** [(2000) 6 SCC 759] to contend that where the court is prima facie of the opinion that contempt has been committed, further direction can be issued in the contempt proceedings itself. 6.I have considered the contentions advanced. The submission made before this Court was with regard to the cancellation of the order dated 2.12.2011. Apparently, the submissions made before this Court have been given effect to by the Government by passing an order dated 27.3.2018. The further contention with regard to appointments under the KSTC would have to be considered on the basis of the availability of vacancies. It is the specific case of the petitioners that they had been issued with appointment orders before the earlier Government Order dated 2.12.2011 was issued. If that be so, the petitioners would have a claim for the benefit of Rule 7 of Part II KS & SSR, in case the KS&SSR or the principles therein are Cont.Case C).Nos.1725/18 & 43/19 10 applicable to appointment in the KSTC. However, the scope of the contempt of court proceedings cannot be so extended to enable the issuance of further writs and directions. Relying on the decision of the Apex Court, the petitioner would contend that in a case where this Court finds prima facie contempt, such further directions could be issued. In the facts and circumstances of the instant case, I am unable to hold that such a course of action would be justified herein. The issue whether the petitioners are entitled to discharge and reappointment in terms of Rule 7 is the matter which has to be independently considered by this Court with specific notice on the issue to the KSTC. In the above view of the matter, the Contempt of Court cases are closed, leaving open the contentions of the parties to be agitated in appropriate proceedings. sd/- **Anu Sivaraman, Judge** sj/14/1/2021 ## **APPENDIX OF Con.Case(C) 1725/2018** **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4.4.2017 IN WPC.NO.1700/2012. ANNEXURE II TRUE COPIES OF THE POSTAL RECEIPTS DATED 22.5.2017.**