Seelanki Satyanarayana, vs Sri Satish Chandra,
2021 Latest Caselaw 1889 AP

            HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

                      Contempt Case No.779 of 2021

ORDER:

This contempt case is filed against the respondents alleging

violation of orders passed by this Court in WP No.19419 of 2018 dated

29.08.2019.

WP No.19419 of 2018 was filed seeking to declare the action of

the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioners, as

illegal and arbitrary. The said writ petition was allowed on 29.08.2019

directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners

forthwith subject to the petitioners possessing other requisite

qualifications.

Counter-affidavit is filed by the 1st respondent stating inter-alia,

that the Executive Council of the 4th respondent-University has the

authority for taking a decision on the subject matter in case of the

regularization of the employees of the University under Section 19(7) of

A.P. Universities Act and that the approval, if any of the 1st or 2nd

respondents will arise, only after the executive council of the 4th

respondent University takes decision on the subject matter; the Higher

Education Department has given instructions to the 4th respondent

University to implement the judgment subject to the eligibility of the

petitioners as per the parameters stipulated by the Apex Court in

Government Letter No.1073315/UE/A1/2020, dated 27.07.2020 and

accordingly, the 4th respondent University examined the fulfillment of

requisite eligibility of each petitioner and found that none of the

petitioners have fulfilled their requisite eligibility as per para 53 of the

KVL, J CC No.779 of 2020

judgment of the Apex Court in 'State of Karnataka vs. Umadevi1' and

hence, the University has issued proceedings dated 27.10.2020,

communicated the same to the petitioners herein and the 1st respondent

tendered unconditional apology for the delay in implementing the order.

Counter-affidavit is also filed by the 4th respondent stating inter-

alia, that the University has examined the eligibility of each of the

petitioners in compliance of the orders of this Court and that none of

the petitioners have fulfilled the eligibility criteria as per para 53 of the

judgment of the Apex Court in Umadevi's case (supra) and passed

speaking order on 27.10.2020 and communicated the same to the

petitioners and the same was also acknowledged by the petitioners; he

also expressed unconditional apology for the delay in implementing the

orders of this Court. Copy of the proceeding dated 27.10.2020 and

copies of the letters addressed to each of the petitioners on 27.10.2020

are also filed along with the counter-affidavit.

As seen from the letter dated 27.10.2020, it is stated that the

petitioners were never appointed against the sanctioned posts, rule of

reservation was not followed at the time of their appointment,

recruitment process was also not followed by the University and that the

petitioners were appointed as daily wage/NMR employees; it is also

stated that the petitioners have not completed minimum period of five

years of service, as on cutoff date 25.11.1993, on which date Act 2 of

1993 came into force.

In view of the facts and circumstances stated above, pursuant to

the directions of this Court in WP No.19419 of 2018, dated 29.08.2019,

the respondents have considered the cases of the petitioners and

(2006) 4 SCC 1

KVL, J CC No.779 of 2020

speaking orders were passed and communicated through letters dated

27.10.2020 to each of the petitioners, this court is of the view that there

is no willful violation of the orders of this Court by the respondents.

The contempt case is, closed accordingly. No order as to costs.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in this contempt

case, shall stand closed.

________________________ KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J Date: 07.05.2021 BSS

KVL, J CC No.779 of 2020