This Contempt of Court case was filed alleging non- compliance with the directions of this Court in the judgment dated 23-9-2014 whereby this Court had directed the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 appeal preferred by the petitioner within a period of two weeks and to communicate the same to the petitioner. In the Contempt of Court case, the petitioner contends that, although a certified copy of the judgment of this Court was handed over to the respondent, who is the Secretary of the Panchayath, on 27-9- 2014, she insisted on obtaining an original copy of the judgment before she would act on the same. Thereafter, it appears that the Panchayath took a decision to reject the appeal preferred by the petitioner. Although the said order rejecting the appeal was stated to have been taken on 13-10-2014, the said decision was communicated to the petitioner only on 11-11-2014.
2. At the request of the petitioner, I directed the respondent to produce the minutes book of the Panchayath before this Court so as to peruse the same. Today, the Secretary of the Panchayath, the respondent herein, appeared in person and produced the minutes book of the Panchayath, a perusal of which would show that the decision to inform the petitioner that action would be taken only on receipt of the original copy of the judgment from the High Court, as also the decision to reject the appeal preferred by the petitioner, were both taken on the same day namely, 13-10-2014.
3. Viewed against the backdrop of the facts in the instant case, the conduct of the respondent, in communicating the decision of the Panchayath to the petitioner after almost a month from the date of the decision of the Panchayath, is far from satisfactory, when considering that the direction in the judgment was to consider and pass orders on the appeal within a period of two weeks and to communicate the said decision to the petitioner. On interacting with the respondent, who was in Court today, I find that although the conduct of the respondent has caused great inconvenience to the petitioner, the said conduct stemmed from her ignorance, rather than from any intention to deliberately flout the directions issued by this Court. Under these circumstances, expressing my displeasure at the manner in which the respondent chose to comply with the directions of this Court, I close the Contempt of Court Case taking note of the fact that the order that was directed to be passed, has since been passed and communicated to the petitioner. It is open to the petitioner to pursue the remedies available to him in law against the orders passed by the Panchayath.
Sd/- A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR (JUDGE) ani/ /truecopy/ P.S. tojudge xxx