High Court for State of TelanganaCC/2400/2016closed no costs

S. Chand Basha v. Smt. Sumita Dawra, I.A.S.,

2017-03-03C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy,Gudiseva Shyam Prasad3 pages

The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy and The Hon'ble Sri Justice G.Shyam Prasad Contempt Case No.2400 of 2016 Date: 03.03.2017 Between:

S.Chand Basha ... Petitioner and Smt.Sumita Dawra, Principal Secretary Higher Education Dept., Velagapudi, Guntur District and another

...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:

Mr.Shaik Khalid for Mohd.Islamuddin Ansari Counsel for the respondents:

GP for Higher Education (AP) The Court made the following:

CVNR, J & GSP, J CC.No.2400 of 2016 Dt: 03.03.2017 Order: (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) This Contempt Case is filed alleging willful disobedience of Order, dated 03-08-2016, in WA.No.90 of 2014, by the respondents.

By the aforesaid order, this Court has directed that the benefit of retrospective regularization may be confined only to computation of the pensionary benefits.

At the hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Higher Education (AP) has placed before the Court G.O.Rt.No.23 Higher Education (CE) Department, dated 16-02-2017, issued by respondent No.1 wherein he has ordered regularization of services of the petitioner as Junior Assistant with effect from 01-01-1989 and confined such regularization only for computation of pensionary benefits (without salary arrears). He has also placed proceedings in RC.No.316/Admn.III-2/2011, dated 21-02-2017, of the Special Commissioner of Collegiate Education, Andhra Pradesh, Vijayawada, directing the Correspondent, Osmania College, Kurnool, to furnish the pay fixation proposals as per G.O.Rt.No.23 HE (CE) Dept. dated 16-02-2017. The

CVNR, J & GSP, J CC.No.2400 of 2016 Dt: 03.03.2017 learned Government Pleader further submitted that further action is being taken for refixation of pension by giving the benefit of retrospective regularization.

In the light of the above proceedings, we do not find the necessity of proceeding with the Contempt Case further. Hence, the Contempt Case is closed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to file a fresh Contempt Case in the event further steps in pursuance of the above proceedings are not taken by the respondents within two months from today.

______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) _________________ (G.Shyam Prasad, J) Dt: 3rd March, 2017 lur