( 1 ) THE petitioner filed this contempt case alleging that the respondents have flouted the orders of this Court dated 25-7-2001 in WP No. 5844 of 2001, and prayed that the contemnors be punished under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

( 2 ) THE Court, by the said order dated 25-7-2001 disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents to implement the order dated 13-9-2001, passed by the learned A. P. Administrative Tribunal in R. P No. 2313 of 1987 at an early date and not later than six weeks from the date of communication of the order and to pay the writ petitioner all the consequential benefits flowing therefrom including fixation of pension and payment of arrears.

( 3 ) IT is not denied before us that the first respondent herein by order dated 16-11-2001 has passed orders pursuant to the orders of this Court. Consequent thereto, the second respondent has also passed orders on 17-11-2001 notionally fixing the pay of the petitioner in the cadre of Deputy Executive Engineer with effect from 18-12-1961 and as Executive Engineer with effect from 6-5-1981.

( 4 ) DURING the course of elaborate submissions, the petitioner, who appeared as party-in-person has contended that the two orders dated 16-11-2001 and 17-11-2001 passed by the first and second respondents respectively do not amount to compliance with the orders passed by this Court dated 25-7-2001 and, therefore, they have committed contempt of Court.

( 5 ) WE are afraid, we cannot agree with the party-in-person.

( 6 ) THE petitioner had earlier filed a contempt case before the learned Tribunal against the first and second respondents. The learned Tribunal converted the same into an original application OA No. 3371 of 1992, and by an order dated 10-4-2000 disposed of the same directing that the petitioner s case for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer, Superintending Engineer based on the seniority given to the petitioner in the category of Deputy Executive Engineer be reconsidered as was done in the case of persons covered by the orders of the Tribunal in R. P. No. 2313 of 1987. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed WP No. 5844 of 2001 to set aside the said order and direct the respondents to fully implement the judgment of the learned Tribunal in RP No. 2313 of 1987, dated 13-9-1989, and also further directing the respondents to ignore the alleged fake charges/punishments which were imposed against the petitioner. This Court by judgment dated 25-7-2001 issued directions as noticed hereinbefore. At this stage, we may notice the directions issued in RP No. 2313 of 1997 and batch, dated 13-9-1989, passed by the Full Bench of the learned Tribunal.

( 7 ) R. P. No. 2313 of 1997 was filed claiming various reliefs including a direction to promote the petitioner as Executive Engineer with effect from 1-4-1964 as Superintending Engineer with effect from 1-8-1976 and to the post of Chief Engineer and Engineer-in-Chief with effect from the date of promotion of one. V. Subbaramaiah. The Full Bench of the learned Tribunal by an elaborate judgment dated 13-9-1989 disposed of the R. P. with certain directions. These directions are - (i) to reconsider the case of the petitioner for promotion as Executive Engineer after examining his case for re-determining his date of promotion as Deputy Executive Engineer and re-fixing his seniority in that category, and (ii) to review me promotion of the petitioner as Executive Engineer and Superintending Engineer, if the petitioner s claim for Deputy Executive Engineer with effect from November, 1955 is accepted.

( 8 ) THE learned Tribunal made it very clear that posts of Executive Engineers, Superintending Engineers and Chief Engineers being selection posts, the promotion of the petitioner to those posts depends not much on his seniority, but on the evaluation of his relative merit and ability and inclusion in panels.

( 9 ) THE respondent has filed a counter-affidavit in this contempt case. I