← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaCC/2393/2015closed no costs

D. Mallikarjuna Rao, v. Smt. Sujatha Sarma,

2016-08-03P Naveen Rao4 pages

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.2393 OF 2015 Between :

D.Mallikarjuna Rao s/o D.Venkaiah, Aged about 41 years, working as Sarpanch of Narsarajupalem Village, r/o. Narsarajupalem (V), Marripudi Mandalam, Prakasam District.

... Petitioner and Smt Sujatha Sarma, working as District Collector, Prakasam District at Ongole and another.

... Respondents The Court made the following:

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO CONTEMPT CASE NO.2393 OF 2015

ORDER:

This Court passed the following order in W.P.No.17825 of 2015 dated 19.06.2015:

"Having regard to the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to submit a detailed representation giving the details of persons who are ineligible but recommended for grant of pension under the scheme and the persons who are excluded from grant of pensionary benefits, though they are entitled. As and when such representation is submitted, the same shall be considered by the District Collector, Prakasam, and pass appropriate orders, as warranted by law within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of such representation."

2. In the counter affidavit, respondents explained the exercise undertaken by the authorities regarding verification of claims of the persons, who were earlier identified as ineligible for sanction of pension and persons who were denied pension, even though they were eligible. Counter affidavit narrates the steps taken for identification of persons, who are eligible for sanction of pension and the persons who are not eligible and steps taken thereon. This Court is satisfied with the explanation offered by the respondents in the counter affidavit. Thus, it cannot be said that there was disobedience of the orders of this Court warranting continuation of proceedings under Contempt of Courts Act. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner submits that out of the persons now identified as eligible to receive pension, one person is not receiving the pension. If so, it is an individual grievance of person, who though identified as eligible, is not receiving pension and such person has to work out his remedies. No further directions can be issued in this case. Contempt Case is closed.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this contempt case shall stand closed.

___________________________ JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

kkm HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

CONTEMPT CASE NO.2393 OF 2015 kkm