ORDER :

1. This contempt case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, by the petitioner – Bhupani Venkata Naidu against one V. Kiran Kumar, Deputy Inspector General of Registration and Stamps.

2. It is alleged that this Court issued a direction and passed final order in W.P.No.3930 of 2021 dated 18.02.2021, which reads as follows :

“….the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the amount on encashment of Earned Leave available to his credit along with 80% retirement gratuity and the respondents are directed to release the amount payable on encashment of Earned Leave to the credit of the petitioner’s leave account and also pay 80% retirement gratuity, in accordance with law, within four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.”

3. After passing final order in W.P.No.3930 of 2021 dated 18.02.2021, the petitioner made a representation requesting for sanction of Earned Leave Encashment for 300 days and also gratuity on 06.04.2021. But, for the reasons best known to the respondent/contemnor, no action was taken and the order was not implemented, thereby, there was inaction of the respondents in not implementing the order of this Court is not only disobedience and disrespect to the orders of this Court, but also frustrating the cause of justice. Therefore, the respondents have deliberately and wilfully flouted the orders of this Court in W.P.No.3930 of 2021 dated 18.02.2021 and thus committed contempt. Therefore, action of the respondent/contemnor attracts contempt and requested to punish the contemnor in accordance with law.

4. The respondent/contemnor/V. Kiran Kumar, Deputy Inspector General of Registration and Stamps filed counter affidavit denying material allegations, while admitting about passing an order by this Court in W.P.No.3930 of 2021 dated 18.02.2021.

5. The events that lead to filing of writ petition by the petitioner are that, the petitioner was trapped by officials of Anti Corruption Bureau while he was working as Sub-Registrar Grade-II at Sub- Registrar Office, Adoni, Kurnool District on 17.06.2010 when he demanded and accepted bribe amount of Rs.50,000/- from the complainant Sri L. Venugopal Reddy, r/o Chinnagonehali village, Adoni Mandal, Kurnool District. The petitioner was suspended from service with immediate effect in the interest of public, as he involved in a case of moral turpitude, by proceedings of Deputy Inspector General of Registration and Stamps vide Proc.No.A/1040/2010 dated 19.06.2010. Later, he was reinstated into service as per the decision of the Government vide Proc.No.A/1040/2010 dated 26.01.2013 of the Deputy Inspector General of Registration and Stamps.

6. The Government has accepted the recommendations of Director General, Anti Corruption Bureau and accorded sanction to prosecute the petitioner who was Accused Officer-1 in the trap case besides initiating departmental enquiry for the irregularities committed by him as noticed by the Anti Corruption Bureau authorities. The respondent/contemnor also narrated various incidents about final reinstatement, imposing penalty, punishment, departmental enquiry, wherein, the suspension period has to be treated as ‘Non-duty’. Accordingly, Government Memo No.31131/Vig.II(2)/2010-20 Revenue (Vigilance.II) Department dated 15.01.2019 has rejected the representation of the petitioner to treat the suspension period as on ‘Duty’. Criminal appeal is also pending before the High Court against the judgment of Trial Court in Calendar Case No.87 of 2013 dated 02.01.2015, which is filed by the State, the petitioner was found not guilty. Thus, the petitioner was acquitted finding him not guilty for the charges under Prevention of Corruption Act, but, punishment was imposed in the departmental proceedings for the suspension period, treating the period as ‘Not on duty’.

7. The respondent/contemnor urged for dismissal of the contempt case on the sole ground that, the contemnor who is Respondent No.3 in the writ petition is solely array