THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO CONTEMPT CASE No. 1586 of 2009. Order: Heard Sri A.Rajashekar Reddy for the respondents. This contempt case has been instituted complaining bitterly that the respondents have deliberately violated the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No. 10406 of 2008 on 2-5-2008. While dealing with W.P.No. 10406 of 2008, I directed the respondents therein in the following terms. “Hence, the respondents are directed to expedite the process of finalizing and take a decision as to whether Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension is to be restored in favour of the petitioners or not and appropriately reasoned decision in this regard be communicated to the petitioners within a maximum period of three months, at any rate before the end of September 2008 i.e., 30-9-2008.” Inspite of this clear and categoric directions, the respondents have not completed the exercise within the stipulated period of three months. When this contempt case has been instituted, notice before admission was ordered on 13-11-2009 and in pursuance of the said notice, an affidavit is filed regretting the delay that is caused in complying with the orders of this Court. However, an order passed on 28-7-2010 has been enclosed to the counter-affidavit, whereby the claim of the petitioners for payment of pension has been negatived, based upon the recommendations made by the State Government. It is therefore, clear that the respondents have decided the issue against the interest of the petitioners herein and whether the orders passed on 28-7-2010 by the 1st respondent herein are legally sustainable or not, is a question which is incapable of being adjudicated or decided in this Contempt of Courts proceedings. It is therefore, open to the petitioners to call in question the validity of the said proceedings. Reserving the said liberty to the petitioners, I do not consider this case to be an appropriate case to launch prosecution against the respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act, though there was considerable amount of delay on their part in complying with the directions issued by this Court. Therefore, leaving it open to the petitioners herein to challenge the validity and sustainability of the orders passed by the 1st respondent on 28-7-2010, this Contempt Case is dismissed and the notice issued on 13-11-2009 is discharged. No costs. ________________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J 24th November, 2010. GRR