Atluri Phanendra v. Dr.P.V.Ramesh Kumar

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT C.C. No.274 of 2018 ORDER:

Heard Mr.A.Rajendra Babu, for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Labour.

The instant contempt case is filed complaining disobedience of the order dated 29.12.2017.

The disobedience complained is that the respondent while forwarding the name of the petitioner did not refer to disabilities, now entered in the register. In other words, according to petitioner, the respondent referred to one disability i.e, 'VH' but did not refer to 'OH' in the communication sent to the Assistant Director, Welfare of Disabled and Senior Citizens, Machilipatnam, Krishna District.

Notice was ordered on 09.02.2018.

The respondent filed counter affidavit and firstly explained the circumstances under which, the reply dated 18.01.2018 was sent to the Assistant Director. According to respondent, the respondent is merely verifying the details forwarded by the Assistant Director but not sponsoring the candidates pursuant to the request from any department. He further clarifies that for the present the employment

exchange is referring to both the disabilities suffered by the petitioner and in proof of such assertion, the signed copy of letter dated 18.01.2018 addressed to Assistant Director is filed as one of the Annexures. On the obligation to implement the order of this Court, the respondent states as follows:

"In this connection, it is to submit, no requests for sponsoring were received at this employment exchange as on date and as and when such sponsoring requests made by the employer/department the instructions issued by the Hon'ble High Court will be followed.

Further, it is to submit that no willful violation of the orders of Hon'ble High Court were made from this office and no such will be occurred in future also. As and when the Sponsoring requests made from any employer in future, the instructions of the Hon'ble High court are followed."

I am satisfied, by placing on record, the stand taken by the respondent in the contempt case, the contempt case can be closed.

Accordingly, contempt case is closed. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed.

________________ S. V. BHATT, J Dt: 07.03.2018 dv