← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaCC/2143/2014closed no costs

G. Ramanna Chetty, v. Sri G. Venkatrami Reddy,

2015-03-13R.Subhash Reddy,A.Shankar Narayana3 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.SHANKAR NARAYANA CONTEMPT CASE No.2143 of 2014 ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Subhash Reddy) This Contempt Case, under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, is filed alleging willful disobedience to the order, dated 08.11.2013, in W.P.No.12878 of 2001.

In the aforesaid writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the order dated, 13.03.2001, in O.A.No.447 of 1992 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and also sought to declare the proceedings in Memo No.Estt.II(ii)/400/91, dated 12.12.1991, of respondent No.1, as illegal. This Court, by following the judgment in the case of Assistant Secretary to Government, Home (Courts-C) Department vs. A.Venkata Rao[1], allowed the writ petition setting aside the order of the Tribunal.

When the matter has come up for hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has produced a copy of the letter in Roc.No.05/2015, dated 10.03.2015, addressed by the

Secretary (FAC), Agricultural Market Committee, Jammalamadugu, YSR Kadapa District, to the Commissioner & Director of Agricultural Marketing, informing that pursuant to the order, dated 18.11.2013, passed by this Court in W.P.No.12878 of 2001, an amount of Rs.49,421/-, which was deducted from the petitioner's retiral benefits, is paid to the petitioner through demand draft bearing No.907880 dated 10.03.2015. In view of the aforesaid letter, though there is some delay in complying with the order of this Court, we are of the view that as the respondents have now complied with the orders of this Court, it is not a fit case to proceed further under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed.

____________________________ JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY _________________________________ JUSTICE A.SHANKAR NARAYANA 13.03.2015 v v

[1] APLJ 1991 (1) 364