B.Chiranjeevi vs Sri K.Narasimha Murthy,
2021 Latest Caselaw 1334 AP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI



HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                      &
             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR


                   CONTEMPT CASE No.819 of 2020

                    (Taken up through video conferencing)


B. Chiranjeevi S/o. Late Narayana Rao,
Aged about 60 years, Rtd. Technical Officer,
O/o Executive Engineer, Krishna Central Division,
Vijayawada, Krishna District.
                                                        .. Petitioner
       Versus

Sri K. Narasimha Murthy,
Superintending Engineer,
Irrigation Circle, Vijayawada-2,
Krishna District, and others.
                                                        .. Respondents

Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. A. Radha Krishna Counsel for the respondents : GP for Services-III

ORAL ORDER Dt: 03.03.2021

per Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ

Heard Mr. A. Radha Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Also heard Mr. K. Bheema Rao, learned Government Pleader for

Services-III, for the respondents.

This contempt case is filed alleging wilful and deliberate violation of

the order of this Court dated 21.05.2020 passed in W.P.No.9016 of 2020.

By the aforesaid order, this Court directed the petitioner to make a fresh

representation before the respondents within a period of ten days from

the date of the order and on receipt of such representation, the

respondents were directed to consider the case of the petitioner and pass

appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of four weeks.

The case presented, as would be seen from the order dated

21.05.2020, is that the petitioner had contended that he is entitled to pay

scale of Rs.1,010-1,800/- in terms of Revised Pay Scales of 1986 and

some judgments as he possesses ITI qualification and he is similarly

situated to many other employees who had been granted the aforesaid

pay scale.

Subsequent to filing of a representation by the petitioner, the

Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Vijayawada, has passed an

order dated 22.06.2020, relevant portion of which reads as follows:

"The pay scales of all Govt., employees were fixed in the

pay Revision commission appointed by the Govt., to all the

cadres duly taking into consideration of their minimum

requisite qualification, duties and responsibilities to the post. As

per G.O.Ms.No.288 F&P (Fin Wing PRC.I) Dept

Dt.17-11-1986 the PRC 1986 has fixed the pay to the post of

Tracer is 910-1625/-. As per the Schedule. II of Rule 6 of

APESS Rules the minimum requisite qualification to the post of

Tracer is I.T.I Civil/Mechanical. The pay scale of Rs.1010-1800

was fixed to the post of D.Man Grade. III which is the next

promotion post to the post of Tracer. As per the existing

service Rules Tracer (Now Technical Assistant) with I.T.I

qualification are eligible to the post of D'Man Grade. III after

putting ten years of service as Tracer.

The applicant in W.P.No.9016/2020 who was initially

appointed as Tracer is not similarly situated (W.C.Estt W.I with

I.T.I qualification) person to that of the individual mentioned in

the G.O.Rt NO:361 Panchayat Raj & Rural Development (E.I)

Dept. Dt.10-05-2019. Hence, there is no feasibility to

implement the D'Man Grade.III scale of Pay Rs.1010-1800 to

the Tracer.

Further it is informed that the applicant was appointed

on compassionate grounds. As G.O.Ms.No.687 G.A. (Ser.A)

Dept., dt.03-10-1977, the applicant is eligible for appointment

to the post of Junior Assistant or equivalent post than that of a

Junior Assistant on compassionate grounds only. Hence, he

was appointed as Tracer i.e., equivalent post of a Junior

Assistant.

In view of the above, and Judgement Dt.21-05-2020 in

W.P.No.9016/2020 it is informed that it is not feasible to

implement the pay scale of Rs.1010-1800 which was fixed to

the post of D.Man Grade. III i.e., the next promotion post to

the post of Tracer."

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no

consideration of the case of the petitioner in accordance with law and

further, the Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Vijayawada, is not

the competent authority to pass such order.

The order dated 22.06.2020 goes to show that in terms of a memo

dated 19.06.2020 issued by the Engineer-in-Chief (AW), Vijayawada, the

Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Vijayawada, had taken up the

consideration of the representation of the petitioner.

We do not find that there is deliberate and wilful violation of the

order of this Court in passing the order dated 22.06.2020. In the

contempt jurisdiction, this Court will not go into the validity of an order

passed unless such order appears, on the face of it, to be arbitrary and

perverse. In the facts of the case, we reserve liberty to the petitioner to

assail the aforesaid order dated 22.06.2020 in accordance with law, if so

advised. All contentions shall remain open for the petitioner to urge in the

event he assails the order dated 22.06.2020 passed by the Superintending

Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Vijayawada.

With the above observations, the Contempt Case stands closed.

No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ                            C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J

                                                                            IBL

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR

CONTEMPT CASE No.819 of 2020

(Per Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ)

Dt: 03.03.2021

IBL