SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(AP) 250

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
BATTU DEVANAND, J.
Dr G. SambasivaRao – Appellant
Versus
K S Jawahar Reddy – Respondent
CONTEMPT CASE NO.1211 of 202O
Decided on : 27-01-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : KALYAN C R
For the Respondent: S APPADHARA REDDY

Headnote:

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Sections 10, 12 – Power of High Court to punish contempts of subordinate courts – Contempt Case has been filed seeking to punish respondents under Sections 10 and 12 of Contempt of Courts Act for willful disobedience of Order passed by this Court –Held, Court noticed that though Respondent No.2 is ready to implement order of this Court, in view of G.O.Ms.No.45 and 59, he could not implement Order of this Court except to process file to Competent Authority for relaxation of ban on transfer orders – Court cannot find fault with respondent No.2 – It appears from record that respondent No.2 made his effort to implement Order of this Court by processing file to Competent Authority – Though Competent Authority relaxed conditions of ban on transfer in case of other similarly situated persons, they did not choose to take same decision to relax conditions of ban on transfer in case of petitioner for reasons best known to them – Ordered Accordingly.

ORDER :

1. This Contempt Case has been filed seeking to punish the respondents under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act for willful disobedience of the Order dated 08.10.2020 passed by this Court in W.P.No.18212 of 2020.

2. The petitioner filed W.P.No.18212 of 2020 against the action of the respondents in not considering the representation dated 16.06.2020 for transfer as illegal and arbitrary. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Medical and Health, at the stage of admission, with their consent, this Court disposed of the Writ Petition by Order dated 18.10.2020, directing the respondents to consider the representation taking into consideration the facts stated by the petitioner therein. Complaining that the order of this Court dated 18.10.2020 is not complied with by respondent No.2 willfully, the present Contempt Case has been filed.

3. A Counter Affidavit has been filed by the respondents.

4. The petitioner filed Reply Affidavit to the Counter Affidavits filed by the respondents.

5. In the Counter Affidavit, it is contended by the respondents that in view of the ban, the case of the petitioner could not be considered to transfer him considering his representation. In the reply affidavit, the petitioner contended that though there is ban on transfers, the respondents issued transfer orders to number of persons and filed the copies of the transfer orders along with reply. Under these circumstances, this Court prima facie is of the opinion that there is willful disobedience in implementing the orders of this Court under the guise of ban and accordingly, issued Notice in Form-1, directing the respondents to appear before this Court.

6. In compliance of the Notice issued in Form-1, the respondents appeared before this Court on 22.06.2021. Respondent No.1 brought to the notice of this Court that he was transferred from the Department of Medical, Health and Family Welfare on 09.10.2020 and joined as Executive Officer of the T.T.D. The Order in the Writ Petition was passed by this Court on 08.10.2020 and it was communicated in the office of the respondents on 16.10.2020.Upon considering the submission of respondent No.1, this Court satisfied that as on the date of communication of the Order of this Court, respondent No.1 is not working as Principal Secretary, Department of Medical, Health and Family Welfare, and as such, he is not proper and necessary party to this Contempt Case, and accordingly, deleted the name of respondent No.1 from the array of the respondents of the present Contempt Case.

7. Subsequently, respondent No.2 filed Additional Affidavit to support their stand for rejection of the case of the petitioner and to affect the transfer of other persons. In the said Additional Affidavit, it is contended by respondent that the representation of the petitioner has been examined and in view of the ban imposed on transfer of employees with effect from 11.07.2019 vide G.O.Ms.No.45, Finance (HR.IPlg and Policy) Department, dated 24.06.2019 read with G.O.Ms.No.59, Finance (HR.I-Plg. & Policy) Department, dated 04.07.2019, the request of the petitioner is rejected. It is informed to the petitioner that the request of the petitioner may be considered at the time of General Transfers on spouse ground as per the rules in force. With regard to the transfers affected to some other similarly situated persons, it is contended that the relevant Government Orders transferring those persons are issued in relaxation of the Orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.45 and 59 by the Competent Authority. In the case of the petitioner, the Competent Authority did not agree the proposal for transfer of the petitioner. Accordingly, the same was informed to the petitioner. As such, there is no willful disobedience in implementing the Orders of this Court by this respondent and sought to dismiss the Contempt Case.

8. After hearing the respective counsel, the Contempt Case is reserved ‘for Orders’. This c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top