G.Shanker, v. Sri.D.Lalith Kumar,

132521

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2396 0F 2024 IN wRtT PET|T|ON NO. 4444 0F 2019 Contempt Case Under Section '10 to '12 of Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondents for deliberate violation and willful disobedience of the order of this Hon'ble Court dated 0110712024 in W.P.No. 4444 OF 2019. Between:

G,Shanker,, S/o Buchi Lingaiah, Aged about 46 years, Occ Business, R/o H.No. 6-2-263i3, Uday Nagar, Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District- 209. ...PETITIONER/PETITIONER AND Sri.D.Lalith Kumar,, General Manager F and A Department, Ramagudam Area-1, Singareni Collieries Company Ltd,Godhavarikhani, Peddapally (Karimnagar) Dist - 505209 ...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner :SRI PULIMAMIDI SHASHIDHAR REDDY Counsel forthe Respondent: SRI P. SRt HARSHA REDDY (SC FOR STNGARENt COLLTERTES CO LTD) The Court made the following: ORDER

l/ HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA CONTEMPT CASE No.2396 OF 2024 In WRIT PETITION NO.4444 0F 2019 / /

ORDER

Heard Sri Pulimamidi Shashidhar Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri P. Sri Harsha Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., appearing on behalf of respondent.

The etiti oner ee ln prayer as under:

"to punish the respondent under Section l0 and 12 of Contempt of Courts Act for his wilful violation and deliberate disobedience to the order in W.P. No. 4444 of 20L9, dated 01.07.2024 passed by this Court and pass ...".

The oDerative Dortion of the r, dated 01.o7.2024 ssed in W.P. No. 4444 of 2019 in I oa rticu !a r ra No,13 is extracted hereunder:

"13.

Takino into nsideration The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, i)

5 ,l The observations of the Apex Court in the judgments (referred to and extracted above), Duly considering the averments made at para Nos.12 and 14 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of Respondents (referred to ii) iii) and extracted above), Duly taking note of the fact as borne on record that there is no justification nor any reasoning in the order impugned dated Oalr.4.O2.2Ot9 passed by the 2nd iv) Respondent herein, Applying principle of doctrine of proportionality to the facts of the present v) case, and In the light of the discussion and conclusion vi) as arrived at as above.

without going into the merits of the rival vii) contentions put-forth by the learned counsel for the Petationer and Iearned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondents and duly considering the interim orders passed by this Court dated 06.03.2019 which are in existence as on date, The writ petition is allowed, the order impugned dated O8/14.O2.2OL9 issued by the 2nd Respondent is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the 2nd Respondent. The 2"d Respondent is directed to reconsider the subject issue

objectively and uninfluenced by its earlier decision dated 08/14.O2.2OL9, issued against the petitioner and re-examine the whole issue afresh again and pass appropriate orders, in accordance to law, in conformity with principles of natural justice, duly taking into consideration the observations of the Apex Court in the judgment (referred to and extracted above) within a period of four (O4) weeks from the date of receapt of the copy of the order and duly communicate its /, /, decision to the Petitioner. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

4.

Sri P. Sri Harsha Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for SCCL, appearing on behalf of respondent brings on record the Proceedings vide Ref.RG.I/PER/C/54/6589, dated 09.12.2024 of the Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Ramagundam-I Area and contends that in pursuance to the orders of this Court dated 01.07.2024 passed in W.P.N0.4444 of 2019, an opportunity of personal hearing was given to the petitioner on 08.11,.2024 and the grievance of the petitioner was heard before the Committee appointed vide \ Lr.No.RG1/PER/C/54/5787, dated 02.11.2024 and detailed speaking order dated 09.12.2024 had been passed. { { <.

5.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the Proceedings dated 09.12.2024 issued in compliance with the directions of this Court dated 01.07.2024 passed in W.P. No.4444 of 2019 are not in true spirit of the orders of this Court dated 01.07.2024 passed in W.p. No.4444 of 2019.

6. This Court opines that merits of the said proceedings dated 09.12.2O24 issued in compliance to the orders of this Court, dated 01.O7.2O24 passed in W.P.No.4444 ol 2OL9 cannot be gone into under Contempt jurisdiction and the Contempt Case is closed giving liberty to the petitioner to pursue the remedies as are available under law against the Proceedings dated O9.12.2O24 issued by the Respondent Company. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed, Sd/- I. NAGA LAKSHMI REGISTRAR / { U //TRUE COPY// \ \ Tto OFFICER To,

1. One CC to SRI PULIMAMIDI SHASHIDHAR REDDY, Advocate IOPUCI 2.oneCCtoSRIP.SRIHARSHAREDDY(SCFoRSINGARENICoLLIERIES Co LTD) ,Advocate [OPUC]

3. Two CD Copies.

w'*

HIGH COURT DArED:2711212024 ,'r HE S Lr1 ,4 Q^ 27 l;;

(I ir

ORDER

* 1t462--.,,r^ {) CC.No.2396 oI 2024 .l I I I CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE WITHOUT COSTS.

,J