IMPORTANT POINT
Willful disobedience of a court order, even if based on negligence or carelessness, constitutes contempt of court and may result in imprisonment and fine.

JUDGMENT

RAVI NATH TILHARI, J. - Heard Sri Kishore Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. Amrith Raj, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This contempt case is filed against the respondent Smt. S. Saraswathi, Deputy Director, Tribal Welfare I.T.D.A., Rampachodavaram, East Godavari District, (Presently Director) with respect to the judgment and order dtd. 14/8/2019 passed by the writ Court in W.P.No.11279 of 2019. FACTS:

3. The petitioner was working as Secondary Grade Teacher, in Ashram Upper Primary School, Kansuluru Village, Chinturu Mandal, East Godavari District. He was not considered for promotion to the post of School Assistant (Maths). He had given representations to the 1st respondent, the last being dtd. 18/7/2019, but when there was no response and two of his juniors were already promoted he filed W.P.No.11270 of 2019 for the following relief:

"... to declare the Orders passed by the Respondents in not treating B Tech with Chemical Engineering with Maths as one of the subjects as required qualification as per G O Ms No 45 Social Welfare TW SER II/A1 Department dated 28 6 2011 for promotion to the post of School Assistant Maths as Illegal arbitrary discriminatory and violates the Article 14 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to effect promotion of the petitioner with effect from 16 7 2019 with all consequential benefits and to pass..."

4. The Writ Court, disposed of the writ petition vide order dtd. 14/8/2019 directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner"s representation dtd. 18/7/2019 strictly in accordance with law, and bearing in mind all the relevant Rules as well as the G.Os., applicable to the case of the petitioner, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

5. The order dtd. 14/8/2019 reads as under:

"Heard Sri P.V. Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare representing the respondents.

2. The petitioner is now working as Secondary Grade Teacher in Ashram Upper Primary School, Kansuluru Village, Chinturu Mandal, East Godavari District. His grievance is that he is not being considered for promotion to the post of School Assistant (Maths), even though he is meeting all the requirements as per G.O.Ms.No.45, Social Welfare (TW.SER.III/A-1) Department, dtd. 28/6/2011. In this context, it is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in Category (1) of Annexure II of this G.O., there is a specification that the candidate for such promotion must possess a Bachelor Degree with Maths as a main subject or one of the three equal optional subjects or a Post Graduate Degree in Maths and a Bachelor of Education Degree with mathematics as one of the main subjects. In this context, the petitioner had also given representations to the 1st respondent, the last one of which is dtd. 18/7/2019. It is represented by the petitioner that there is no response with reference to such representation so far from the 1st respondent and in as much as two of his juniors were already promoted, any delay in considering his representation would affect him and thus he would suffer loss in promotional avenue.

3. Considering the material so placed and the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, in as much as the interim relief sought is quite innocuous in nature, finding prima facie that the petitioner is meeting all the requirements of G.O.Ms.No.45 referred above, the 1 respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dtd. 18/7/2019, strictly in accordance with law, and bearing in mind all the relevant Rules as well as the G.Os., applicable to the case of the petitioner, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. "

6. The petitioner served a copy of the order to the respondent on 07. 09