Ahmed Mohiuddin v. Sri N. Siva Shankar, Ias

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.2045 OF 2016 DATED : 23.06.2017 Between :

Ahmed Mohiuddin S/o.Late :Lala Bhagan, Occu : Asst Electrician in temple, Mallikarjuna Swamy Devasthanam, Komravelli Mandal, Siddipet District.

..

Petitioner And Sri N.Siva Shankar, I.A.S, Principal Secretary, Revenue Endowment -I Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & others.

.. Respondents This court made the following :

- 2 - THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.2045 OF 2016 ORDER :

This Court disposed of W.P.No.7948 of 2013 on 25.01.2016 directing the petitioner to file an affidavit giving undertaking for his willingness to work in any other place and in any equivalent post. This Court further directed the respondents to take steps to accommodate the petitioner wherever it is possible and permissible and till such alternative job and/or place is made, the petitioner should be continued in the service of the 3rd respondent-temple and should be paid the scale attached to the post of Assistant Electrician.

2.

Learned Government Pleader produced proceedings of the Deputy Commissioner, Sri Mallikarjuna Swamy Devasthanam, Komuravelli, Siddipet District, dated 19.02.2017 which proceedings disclose that as there is no sanctioned post of Assistant Electrician, the pay was determined in the time scale of Rs.3850-30,765/-, which is the scale attached to the post of attender and extended the same with effect from 27.11.2009 with all benefits. Learned Government pleader also informs the Court that the arrears of the amount are paid to the petitioner. This fact is not denied by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3.

Having regard to the steps taken by the respondentauthorities, it cannot be said that there was wilful disobedience of the orders of the Court, warranting initiation of proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act.

- 3 - 4.

It is also appropriate to note that aggrieved by the decision in the writ petition, the respondents filed W.A.Sr.No.872 of 2017 and the same is pending consideration of the Division Bench. Thus, petitioner can prosecute his claim with reference to provision of alternative employment as directed by this Court after the disposal of the writ appeal.

5.

Accordingly, the Contempt case is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 23rd June, 2017 Rds

- 4 - HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO CONTEMPT CASE.No.2045 OF 2016 DATED :23.06.2017 Rds