IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K. MANMADHA RAO, J.
Palla Sri Rama Sanjeeva Rao - Petitioner
Versus
K. Santhosha Rao - Respondent
Contempt Case No. 4737 of 2022
Decided On : 14-06-2023
Contempt of Court - Willful Disobedience - Contempt of Courts Act, Sections 10 to 12 - The court discussed the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, Sections 10 to 12, and the orders passed in W.P.No.20923 of 2020 and WA No.692 of 2022. The key legal provisions discussed include the directions for appointment, seniority, pay fixation, and compliance with court orders.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed a contempt case against the respondents for willful disobedience to the court's order dated 11.07.2022 in W.P.No.20923 of 2020. The respondents were directed to appoint the petitioners as Junior Linemen with consequential benefits. The respondents partially complied with the order, leading to the contempt case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondents had partially complied with the court's order, but the petitioners alleged intentional and deliberate delay and non-compliance, amounting to contempt of court.
Issues: The issues involved non-compliance with the court's order, intentional delay, and the petitioners' claim of contempt of court against the respondents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court decided to grant time to the respondents to implement the directions of the court, considering the submissions made by the Standing Counsel.
Final Decision: The Contempt Case was closed, granting time to the respondents to implement the court's directions. No order as to costs. Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
ORDER :
This contempt case has been filed by the petitioners to punish the respondents under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act for their willful disobedience to the order dated 11.07.2022 passed by this Court in W.P.No.20923 of 2020.
2. Heard Sri G. Seena Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri Metta Chandra Sekhar Rao, learned Standing Counsel and Sri Shreyas Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents/contemnors.
3. This Court vide order, dated 11.07.2022 in W.P.No.20923 of 2020, has disposed of the writ petition. The operative portion of the said order, reads as under :
4. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent No.3 denying all the averments made in the petition and stated that, aggrieved by the above order dated 11.07.2022 in WP No.20923 of 2020, the APEPDCL preferred an appeal vide W.A.No.692 of 2022 before a Division Bench of this Court and the same was disposed of vide judgment dated 10.10.2022 and the operative portion of the said judgment reads as under :
With the above modification, the appeal is disposed of.”
It is further stated that after receipt of the above order, instructions were sought from the Corporate Office, Visakhapatnam and the same was received from Corporate Office vide Memo No.EPCOR-06003(06003(16)/1/2021-IR-T-3-COR/E-338965/I.No442090/2022, dated 24.11.2022 as follows :
ii. Further approach the S.L.A./APEPDCL along with connected records and obtain legal opinion on the subject matter for the next course of action in respect of the High Court orders in WA No.692 of 2022.
It is further stated that in compliance of the orders in WA No.692 of 2022, allotment orders were issued to the writ petitioners for provisional selection in the batch of 2006-2007 Junior Linemen Recruitment to Operation Division Rajamahendravaram vide Lr.No.SE/O/RJY/EE-T/PO/JAO/ ADM/SA-2/D.No.1067/22, dated 26.11.2022. Accordingly, the Executive Engineer/Operation/ Rajahmundry issued appointment and Re-posting orders to the writ petitioner vide Memo No.EE/O/RMV/JAO/ADM/SA-1/D.No.1427/22, dated 26.11.2022, Memo No.EE/O/RMV/JAO/ADM/SA-1/ D.No.1328/22, dated 26.11.2022 and also the notional pay is fixed for Rs.39,410/- w.e.f. 09.11.2020 and with consequent increments pay is revised to Rs.40,675/- w.e.f. 01.10.2021 and Rs.41,940/- w.e.f. 01.10.2022. The gross arrears bill from 09.11.2020 to 28.11.2022 was arrived for Rs.12,87,600/- and after deductions of PT, SFMS, EPF, GIS an amount of Rs.1,59,109/- net amount was arrived Rs.11,28,493/- to each individuals vide Lr.No.EE/O/RMV/JAO/ADM/SA.1/ D.No.193/23, dated 14.2.2023. Accordingly, the said arrears of salary and allowances will be paid to the individual
The main legal point established is the court's authority to enforce its orders and the consequences of willful disobedience, as governed by the Contempt of Courts Act.
Compliance with court orders is essential, and failure to comply may result in contempt of court proceedings.
The main legal point established is the importance of prompt and bona fide compliance with court orders to avoid contempt of court.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that willful disobedience of court orders, delays in compliance, and attempts to defeat court orders constitute contempt of court, and unconditiona....
The pendency of a writ appeal does not absolve the respondents from complying with the court's order, unless a stay of the order has been obtained from the appellate court.
The court upheld the imposition of costs due to the repeated non-compliance with its orders, emphasizing the necessity of adherence to judicial rulings.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.