Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 473
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
EASWARAN S., J
BIJU V – Appellant
Versus
JAYADEVAN MD – Respondent
CON.CASE(C) NO. 2779 OF 2024 | WP(C) NO.35314 OF 2018 | W.A NO.1751 OF 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ, KUM.THULASI K. RAJ, SMT.APARNA NARAYAN MENON, SMT.CHINNU MARIA ANTONY
For the Respondents: SHRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR, SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN
Compliance with court orders ensures proper legal redress and upholds rule of law.
Headnote:This Contempt Case alleges non-compliance with a previous judgment (30.07.2024, W.P.
(C) No.35314 of 2018). The proceedings were reopened following appeal disposal (W.A. No.1751 of 2024). The court found reinstatement confirmed, thus compliance achieved. The main issue framed was whether non-compliance prompts contempt proceedings. The court concluded compliance satisfied and closed the case.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. non-compliance of court orders warrants contempt proceedings. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. reinstatement confirms compliance with prior court judgment. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
This Contempt Case is filed alleging non-compliance of the judgment dated 30.07.2024 in W.P.(C) No.35314 of 2018. This Court initially had closed the Contempt by order dated 07.11.2024 giving liberty to the petitioner to file an application for re-opening the same after the disposal of W.A No.1751 of 2024.
2. By judgment dated 03.12.2025, the Division Bench had disposed of the appeal pursuant to which an application for re-opening of the Contempt was moved and this Court by order dated 11.12.2025 re- opened the Contempt proceedings. On 18.12.2025, when the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the order regarding the re-reinstatement of the petitioner shall be passed at the earliest. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned to today for further consideration.
3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the respondents placed on record an affidavit dated
04.01.2026 stating that the petitioner has been re-instated in service. This fact is confirmed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
In view of the above, this Court finds that the judgment dated
30.07.2024 stands complied. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed.
Sd/-
