Contempt of court involves willful disobedience of court orders, which undermines judicial authority, emphasizing the need for compliance to maintain public confidence in the justice system.

ORDER

Heard Sri V.Padmanabha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.Ramalingeswara Rao, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The above contempt case is filed complaining violation of the interim order dated 11.07.2024 in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in W.P.No.14563 of 2024.

3. The petitioner filed the aforementioned writ petition to declare the action of respondents 2 to 4 therein in not implementing the enhancement of the age of superannuation from 60 to 62 years, in pursuance of Resolution dated 28.04.2022 in the minutes of the 136^th meeting of the Board of Directors of A.P. Backward Classes Cooperative Finance Corporation Limited, as illegal and arbitrary.

4. An interim order was granted on 11.07.2024, directing the 3^rd respondent i.e. V.C. and Managing Director, A.P. Backward Classes Cooperative Finance Corporation Limited, to continue the petitioner in service till the petitioner attains the age of 62 years or any further order from this Court.

5. The contempt case was filed on 07.08.2025. It was contended that the 3^rd respondent issued proceedings dated 16.07.2024, in pursuance of the interim order, to continue the individual in service till he attains 62 years, subject to the outcome of interim orders/receipt of orders from the Government of Andhra Pradesh / vacation of interim orders by the High Court, whichever occurs first.

6. Be that as it may, the respondent issued proceedings dated 29.07.2025, one year after passing the interim order, retiring and relieving the petitioner from the duties immediately by making alternative arrangements.

7. Sri V.Padmanabha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the respondent violated the interim order dated 11.07.2024 deliberately and intentionally, and hence, he is liable to be punished.

8. As seen from the High Court Website, a counter affidavit (vacate stay petition) was initially filed on 30.09.2024, however, it was returned. Later, it was resubmitted and numbered on 12.02.2025.

9. In the counter affidavit, it was contended, interalia, that the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued Circular Memo No.1813129/FIN01-HR/212/2022-HR-IV, dated 23.09.2022. In the said memo, it was indicated that the age of superannuation from 60 to 62 years was extended to certain Government PSUs/Corporations/Institutions/Companies/Societies/including Educational Institutions/Non-teaching Staff of Universities, without having the necessary competency. The G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR IV-FR & LR) Department, dated 31.01.2022 would not apply to the categories of employees, except the four categories of employees provided therein. In some other writ petition relating to similarly placed corporations, a request was made to enhance the age of superannuation from 60 to 62 years, was rejected.

10. Sri K.Ramalingeswara Rao, learned counsel for the respondent, would submit that the respondent has not violated the interim order passed by this Court and requested to dismiss the contempt case by discharging the respondent.

11. Contempt case was initially listed on 14.08.2025, and notice was ordered. Thereafter, it was listed on 12.09.2025 and adjourned at the request of learned counsel for the respondent. Later, the C.C. was adjourned at the request of learned counsel for the respondent on a couple of occasions. Thereafter, the contempt case was admitted on 14.11.2025. The respondent/contemnor appeared before this Court on 05.12.2025, and his presence was dispensed with for the time being. On 26.12.2025 whe