This is a petition seeking initiation of action in contempt against the respondents. According to the petitioner, the direction contained in the judgment dated 20.01.2014 in W.P.(C). No.9865/2013 has not been complied with. The case of the petitioner is that, apart from the two boards that were erected, certain other boards have been put up by the Residents Association through the petitioner, as authorised by the Corporation. The said boards have been removed by the Corporation. It is contended that the said action of the Corporation amounts to willful disobedience of the direction of this Court.
2. An affidavit has been filed by the Additional Secretary of the Corporation. According to the Corporation, only two name boards were installed by the Corporation. They are the only two authorised boards. No other person has any authority to install additional boards on the road in question. Therefore, the unauthorised boards were removed. Action also has been taken to ensure that the authorised boards are not defaced by any miscreants. Therefore, it is contended that they have complied with the direction of this Court.
Cont.Case(C) No.884 of 2014 2
3. Heard. The direction contained in the judgment reads as follows :
“3. Heard. Since it is admitted that two name boards had been erected by the 1st respondent Corporation of Kochi, it is for the said authority to take action against defacing of such name boards. If unauthorised name boards are installed by unidentified persons, the 1st respondent shall also be at liberty to remove such unauthorised boards. If instances of defacing the authorised boards are brought to the notice of the 1st respondent, the said authority shall take appropriate action in the matter to restore the boards and to bring the miscreants to book. It is for the petitioner to bring such instances to the notice of the 1st respondent, at the appropriate time.
This Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to take appropriate action, as indicated above, in the event of instances of any of the authorised boards being defaced being brought to the notice of the said authority by the petitioner.”
A perusal of the above shows that, the contention of the Corporation in the writ petition was also that only two name boards have been erected by the Corporation. The direction was confined to initiation of action against defacing of name boards by any miscreant. The present case of the petitioner is that, various other boards have been put up by the Residents Association through the petitioner. The said boards have been removed by the Corporation. The respondents have stated in the affidavit filed that, the unauthorised boards have been removed in accordance with the decision of the Town Planning Committee dated 26.02.2014. The action of the Cont.Case(C) No.884 of 2014 3 Corporation cannot be characterised as violation of the direction of this Court. As already noticed above, the direction in the judgment was confined to ensuring that, defacing of the authorised boards by miscreants should be prevented. The petitioner has no case that any of the authorised boards have been defaced by miscreants thereafter. The question as to whether the petitioner or the Residents Association had any authority to install other name boards, is not germane to the scope of the enquiry in this case, the present action being a contempt case. Here the enquiry is confined to the question as to whether the respondents are guilty of wilful violation of the direction of this Court. Since there are no other allegations against the authorised name boards put up by the Corporation, I do not consider it necessary to pursue this contempt case any further. The same is therefore, closed.
Sd/-
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.
AV