N.Gnanarathnam (Died Per Lrs) v. Sri.M. Bhagavantha Rao

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.K. JAISWAL C.C.No.No.2031 of 2012

ORDER

This contempt case is filed alleging willful disobedience of the orders of this Court in W.P.No.17366 of 2006 dated 20.09.2011. 2.

The deceased first petitioner, while working as an Officer, MMG-III in State Bank of Hyderabad, filed W.P.No.17366 of 2006 for correction of his date of birth. During pendency of the writ petition, his date of birth was corrected and subsequently, he made a representation dated 20.01.2010 to the 6th respondent therein to grant all consequential benefits. This Court, by order dated 20.09.2011, disposed of the said writ petition directing the 6th respondent to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 20.01.2010 for payment of consequential benefits as per his entitlement, in accordance law, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of the said order. Thereafter, the writ petitioner died on 10.02.2012 at Hyderabad. Alleging that the orders of this Court in the aforesaid writ petition have not complied with by the 6th respondent, the legal representatives of the deceased first petitioner filed the present contempt case in the year 2012. 3.

Though notice sent to the respondent, 6th respondent in the writ petition, it was returned un-served with a report that the respondent retired from Bank service long back and is residing at

MSKJ, J C.C.No.2031 of 2012 Chennai and as his address is not known, the petitioner has not taken any steps.

4.

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and perused the material on record.

5.

A perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the contempt application would show that pursuant to the orders of this Court in W.P.No.17366 of 2006, the respondent had considered the representation of the deceased first petitioner and rejected the same vide letter dated 10.02.2012 for the reasons mentioned therein. 6.

Inasmuch as the respondent, in compliance of the order dated 20.09.2011 passed by this Court in W.P.No.17366 of 2006, has considered the representation of the deceased first petitioner and passed appropriate orders, I see no contempt much less willful contempt of the order of this Court.

7.

Hence, the contempt case is closed. No costs. _________________ M.S.K. JAISWAL, J.

1st September, 2017 sj