A. Sammakka, v. Neetu Kumari Prasad, I.A.S., Hyd

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO CONTEMPT CASE No. 2004 OF 2017 DATED : 02.02.2018 Between :

Smt. A.Sammakka, w/o.Late A.Rajeshwar Rao, Aged: 56 years, Sweeper, Panchayat Raj Department, ZPSS, Nallagunta village, Venkatapuram Mandal, Jaya Shankar district .. Petitioner And Smt. Neetu Kumari Prasad, IAS, The Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad, Telangana .. Respondent This court made the following :

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE P.NAVEEN RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.2004 OF 2017 ORDER:

The Writ Petition was disposed of by order dated 17.3.2017 directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner and to pass orders having regard to the proposals made by the Chief Executive Officer vide his letter dated 18.12.2014.

2.

Having regard to the proposals sent by the Chief Executive Officer, it was incumbent for the Commissioner, Panchayat Raj to take a decision. No such decision was made. On the contrary, the Chief Executive Officer, passed order on 25.10.2017. Referring to the said order, Commissioner filed affidavit stating that the order is complied with. 3.

Taking due note of the contents of the counter of second respondent, particularly Paragraph-4, as the Court was not satisfied regarding the statement made by the Commissioner, Contempt was admitted, and Form-I notice was issued.

4.

Commissioner is present before this Court today. 5.

Learned Government Pleader produced proceedings of the Commissioner dated 22.1.2018 rejecting the proposals of the Chief Executive Officer for regularization of the services of

the petitioner holding that the petitioner do not have the prescribed educational qualifications.

6.

In view of the same, the order of this Court is complied.

7.

However, it is pertinent to note that in terms of the decision of the Court, appropriate steps ought to have been taken immediately by the respondents and the competent authority could not have waited for filing of Contempt, issuance of notice and thereafter appearance, to take a decision as now reflected in proceedings dated 22.1.2018. such conduct is not appreciated.

8.

Copy of the order of the Commissioner dated 22.1.2018 is furnished to the Counsel for the petitioner. It is open to the petitioner to work out her remedies if so advised, aggrieved by the decision of the Commissioner. 9.

Contemnors are discharged. Contempt case is closed.

______________ P. NAVEEN RAO,J Date: 2.2.2018 KPM