Items No.35-37
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
C.A.Nos.33, 34 & 35 of 2018
COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hima Kohli)
1.
C.A.No.33 of 2018 arises from the order dated 29.08.2018 passed in C.C.No.1918 of 2018, a suo motu contempt petition taken up by the learned Single Judge on noticing non-compliance of the order dated 22.06.2018, passed in I.A.No.1 of 2018 filed by the petitioner in W.P.No.21225 of 2018.
2. C.A.No.34 of 2018 arises from the order dated 29.08.2018 passed in C.C.No.1862 of 2018, a suo motu contempt petition taken up by the learned Single Judge on noticing non-compliance of the order dated 22.06.2018 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2018 filed by the petitioner in W.P.No.20343 of 2018.
3. C.A.No.35 of 2018 arises from the order dated 29.08.2018 passed in C.C.No.1915 of 2018, a suo motu contempt petition taken up by the learned Single Judge noticing non-compliance of the order dated 18.06.2018 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2018 filed by the petitioner in W.P.No.21225 of 2018.
4. Mr. A.Sanjeev Kumar, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellants concedes that there was a delay of three months on the part of the appellants in implementing the interim orders dated 22.06.2018 and 18.06.2018 and awarding weightage points to the petitioners on spouse grounds in the transfer counselling C.A.Nos.33, 34 & 35 of 2018 Page 1 of 2 2 conducted in terms of the Telangana Teachers (Regulation of Transfers) Rules, 2018. He submits that after three months, weightage points were duly awarded to the petitioners and they were given a posting of their choice. The said submission was also made before the learned Single Judge, who accepted the contrition offered by the appellants, but has imposed a sentence of fine of Rs.2,000/- on them, failing which it was directed that the appellants would have to undergo sentence of imprisonment for a period three days.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants states that the appellant in C.A.No.34 of 2018 had superannuated on 30.06.2019 and the appellant in C.A.Nos.33 and 35 has not faced any contempt proceedings before any other court. He also clarifies that the fine of Rs.2,000/- was deposited by both the appellants, in terms of the impugned order, on 31.10.2018.
6. We are of the opinion that the matters ought to be closed in view of the regret expressed by the appellants and keeping in mind the fact that they have already deposited the fine amounts.
7. The appeals are accordingly closed along with the pending applications, if any.
_________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ ______________________ B.VIJAYSEN REDDY, J 10.06.2021 Lrkm/pln C.A.Nos.33, 34 & 35 of 2018 Page 2 of 2