APHC010462272023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3329]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 5183/2023 Between:

Mamuduru Prem Sagar and Others ...PETITIONER(S)

AND D Tirumala Rao I P S ...CONTEMNOR Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. V MALLIK Counsel for the Contemnor:

1. M SOLOMON RAJU The Court made the following:

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 5183/2023

ORDER:

This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the orders dated 19.04.2023 passed by this Court in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.8986 of 2023.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this Court passed an order dated 19.04.2023 in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.8986 of 2023, which is extracted hereunder:

“There shall be an interim direction directing the respondent No.2 herein to consider the case of the petitioners under the compassionate appointment scheme as the scheme in enforce with the respondent No.2-organisation, without reference to the condition/clause 4.4 of impugned circular No.PD- 2/2023, dated 31.03.2023 in accordance with the G.O.Ms.No.22, dated 12.07.2022, subject to the eligibility of the petitioners as per the G.O.Ms.No.22, dated 12.07.2022.”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners herein are entitled for consideration under the scheme of the compassionate appointment as per G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 12.07.2022. In deviation to the terms of G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 12.07.2022, the respondents not considered the case of the petitioners. Hence, this Contempt Petition.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that this Court directed the respondent to consider the candidatures of the petitioners, if they are entitled as per G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 12.07.2022, they should be considered. In compliance of the orders of this Court, the respondents scrutinized every applicant as per the terms of G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 12.07.2022 and issued separate proceedings dated 20.10.2023 holding that some of the applicants are not entitled for appointment as per the terms of G.O.Ms.No.22 and accordingly said proceedings were served upon the petitioners.

6. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the direction of this Court is to consider the candidatures of the petitioners pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 12.07.2022, the respondents considered the case of the petitioners in terms of G.O.Ms.No.22 without any deviation and passed speaking orders as directed by this Court. Therefore, there is no fault or deviation on the part of the respondents. As such, the allegation of the petitioners that the respondents not complied with the orders of this Court and violated the orders of this Court are incorrect and contrary to the facts in hand. In view of the same, the present Contempt case is liable to be closed.

7. Considering the submissions made by both the learned counsel and on perusal of the material placed on record, it is observed that this Court specifically directed the respondent to consider the case of the petitioners with reference to G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 12.07.2022 and once the respondent applied the terms of G.O.Ms.No.22 while considering the case of the petitioners, it can be construed that the respondent has complied with the orders of this Court. In the case in hand, the respondent issued proceedings after considering the case of the petitioners in terms of G.O.Ms.No.22. In view of applying G.O.Ms.No.22 as directed, no violation is found in the case of the petitioners. It is further observed that the petitioner has not made out any contemptuous action on the part of the respondents nor any guilty. Hence, the contempt case is liable to be closed. 8. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed, granting liberty to the