HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA CONTEMPT CASE No.2649 OF 2024

ORDER:

Heard Sri Yemmiganur Soma Srinath Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Sri C.R. Sridharan, learned Senior Designated Counsel representing Sri G.V.S. Ganesh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents on record.

2. Complaining violation of the order of this Court dated 03.06.2024 passed in W.P. No. 40079 of 2018, the present Contempt Case is filed.

3. The relevant portion of the order of this Court dated 03.06.2024 passed in W.P. No. 40079 of 2018 is extracted hereunder:

“11. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and duly considering the averments made in counter affidavit filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 3 (referred to and extracted above), the 3^rd respondent bank is directed to consider the case of the petitioner to accord promotion to the petitioner, in accordance to the promotion policy of the bank as per the guidelines of the 4^th respondent, in accordance to law, within a period of four (04) weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, duly taking into consideration the specific averments made by the petitioner in support of the affidavit filed by the petitioner in particular at para Nos. 5 to 32, and pass appropriate orders in accordance to law, in conformity with principles of natural justice and communicate the decision to the petitioner.

12. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.”

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the specific directions issued by this Court in its order dated 03.06.2024 passed in W.P. No. 40079 of 2018 had not been complied with, and that the mere filing of a writ petition challenging the proceedings issued in compliance with the directions of this Court dated 03.06.2024 passed in W.P. No. 40079 of 2018 would not preclude this Court from exercising its contempt jurisdiction, since there is violation of the specific directions issued by this Court in W.P. No. 40079 of 2018.

5. Learned Senior Designated Counsel brings to the notice of this Court that, in compliance with the directions of this Court dated 03.06.2024 passed in W.P. No. 40079 of 2018, a detailed speaking order dated 16.09.2024 vide Ref: HR:1331:2024 had been issued by the respondent Union Bank, and the same had been communicated to the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner, being aggrieved by the said proceedings dated 16.09.2024, has filed W.P. No. 20996 of 2025, which is pending final adjudication before this Court. Therefore, the contempt case needs to be closed.

6. In view of the fact as borne on record that the petitioner had already challenged the order dated 16.09.2024 issued by the respondent Union Bank in compliance with the directions of this Court dated 03.06.2024 passed in W.P. No. 40079 of 2018, by filing W.P. No. 20996 of 2025, which is pending final adjudication, this Court opines that the petitioner has already pursued his remedy against the proceedings issued in compliance with the directions of this Court, and therefore, this Court is not inclined to proceed with the contempt.

7. Taking into consideration:

a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Senior Designated Counsel representing the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents on record, c) The order of this Court dated 03.06.2024 passed in W.P.No.40079 of 2018, d) The proceedings of the respondents Union Bank vide Ref: HR:1331:2024 dated 16.09.2024 issued to the petitioner in compliance to the directions of this Court dated 03.06.2024 passed in W.P.No.40079 of

2018, e) The fact that the petitioner had challenged the proceedings dated 16.09.2024 issued by the respondents Union Bank by filing W.P.No.20996 of 2025 before this Court and the same is pending final adjudication, This Court opi