Willful disobedience of an interim Court order by authorities, despite providing excuses regarding administrative staffing patterns or lack of sanctioned posts, renders the officials liable for contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, especially when judicial mandates confirm long-standing employment status.

Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may be pleased to may be pleased to punish the Respondents for willfully and deliberately violating the orders dated 26.12.2022 passed by this Honourable Court in and IOW of 11101 Ri W.P.No.41665 of 2022 and punish them under Section 10 to 12 of the Contempt of the Courts Act, 1971 and pass such.

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.T BALAJI

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

1.P SUBASH

2.RAMALINGESWARA RAO KOCHARLA KOTA

3.C INDRANI

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

CONTEMPT CASE No.745 of 2023

This Court made the following

ORDER

1. This Contempt Case has been filed complaining the willful disobedience in implementing the interim orders dated 26.12.2022 passed by this Court in W.P.No.41665 of 2022.

2. The petitioner filed W.P.No.41665 of 2022 to declare the impugned notice vide proceedings No.RC.No.A1/241/TRICOR/2022-23, dated 15.12.2022 issued by the Respondent No.4 therein dispensing with the services of the petitioner from 16.12.2022 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and amounts to circumventing the orders of this Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No.8859/2015 and consequently to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as Sweeper-cum-Attender in 4th respondent corporation by setting aside the notice vide proceedings No. .RC.No.A1/241/TRICOR/2022-23, dated 15.12.2022 and this Hon’ble Court on 26.12.2022 passed the following order:

“Heard both sides.

For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit filed in support of the application and having regard to the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, there shall be an interim direction to the respondents to continue the petitioner as Sweeper-cum-Attendar in the 4th respondent Corporation forthwith by suspending the Notice vide Proceedings No.RC.No.A1/241/TRICOR/2022-23, dated 15.12.2022, issued by the 4th respondent, for a period of four (04) weeks.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though this Hon’ble Court specifically directed to continue the services of the petitioner by suspending the impugned proceedings under which dispensing with the services of the petitioner dated 15.12.2022. Even after suspension of proceedings, for one reason or the other, the petitioner did not allow to continue her services and also not allowed to affix the biometric on any day and not paid any salaries thereafter. Therefore, the respondents deliberately, intentionally flouted the orders of this Hon’ble Court and they are liable for punishment under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short “the Act, 1971”). He further submits that on 14.1.2022 the 4th respondent herein issued proceedings fixing the minimum Time Scale pay as assigned to the Last Grade Services and Revised Pay Scales, 2015 apart from all other benefits i.e., DA, HRA and CCA by considering the petitioner as full time contingent employee. Even though on 14.11.2022 itself conferred the minimum Time Scale and allowances as entitled by the petitioner but the very next month i.e., 15.12.2022 with an intention to circumvent the orders of this Court issued proceedings by dispensing with the services of the petitioner permanently is contrary to law and certainly it is an Act of afterthought with malice intention. Therefore, the respondents are liable for punishment under Sections 10 and 12 of the Act, 1971.

4. Respondent No.1 filed counter contending as under:

“4. It is submitted that the Respondent Corporation is a r