D.Satyanarayana vs Sri Ch. Narasimha Reddy
2025 Latest Caselaw 5026 Tel

Telangana High Court

D.Satyanarayana vs Sri Ch. Narasimha Reddy on 23 April, 2025

Author: K. Lakshman

Bench: K. Lakshman

              HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

               CONTEMPT CASE No.1893 OF 2010

ORAL ORDER:

None appears for the petitioners as well as respondents.

2. This contempt case is filed alleging the willful and

deliberation violation of order dated 30.12.2009 in W.P.M.P.

No.37523 of 2009 in W.P.No.28907 of 2009. Vide the aforesaid

order, this Court directed respondent therein to consider the case

of the petitioner in terms of Judgment of the Division Bench in W.A

No.1434 of 2008 and batch dated 10.11.2009 and pass appropriate

orders in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from

the date of receipt of the said order.

3. According to the petitioner respondent did not comply with

the order.

4. Respondent No.2 has filed counter contending that in

compliance with the direction of the Division Bench, read with the

conditionalities mentioned in the above notifications the

petitioner's case has been considered. While so on verification of

the records it is observed that the petitioner has failed in the police

climbing test which is a pre-condition for considering for the post

of Junior Lineman (contract) in as much as there are no vacant posts of the Junior Lineman (contract) in Operation Circle,

Karimnagar against the roaster point meant for the petitioner. All

the 398 posts notified in the circle were filled up on 01.08.2008

itself. Thus in compliance with the said order speaking order

dated 26.02.2010 was issued to the petitioner herein. Therefore,

there is no deliberate, intentional violation of the order by the

respondents. Though the said counter was filed in January, 2011,

petitioner herein did not file reply adverting to the same.

5. As per the Official website of this Court W.P.No.28907 of

2009 was disposed of on 10.03.2020.

6. In the light of the same, nothing remains in the present

contempt case to adjudicate further.

7. Accordingly, the contempt case is closed.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending

in the Contempt Case shall stand closed.

___________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J April 23, 2025 pld