IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CONTEMPT CASE NO.970 OF 2011 Between : V.Suryanarayana …PETITIONER A N D S.Bhale Rao …RESPONDENT The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CONTEMPT CASE NO.970 OF 2011 O R D E R : This Contempt Case is filed with a prayer to punish the respondent for alleged violation of orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.15187 of 2011, dated 08.06.2011. 2. The petitioner herein filed W.P.No.15187 of 2011, seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the representations, dated 01.07.2010, 19.07.2010, 17.01.2011 and 30.03.2011 of the petitioner for revocation of suspension order issued vide G.O.Ms.No.122, dated 17.12.2008 and as per G.O.Ms.No.526, dated 19.08.2008 and also for payment of remaining subsistence allowance. 3. This Court by order, dated 08.06.2011 disposed of the Writ Petition directing respondent No.1 to take appropriate decision on the representations of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and also pay subsistence allowance to the petitioner. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that in pursuance of order passed by this Court, Government issued G.O.Rt.No.371, dated 17.08.2011, which reads thus: “The Government have examined all the representations of Sri V.Suryanarayana, in furtherance of the orders of the Hon’ble High Court, dated 08.06.2011 in W.P.No.15187 and in accordance with the stipulations of the G.O.Ms.No.526, General Administration (Services C) Department, dated 19.08.2009, a review has been conducted and it is decided to continue him under suspension, until further orders since a criminal (case No.20/RCA-RJY/2008) was filed against him on the charge of possession of disproportionate assets and in another case (vide in Crime No.17/RCA-RJY/1998). The Special Judge for SPE & ACB cases, Visakhapatnam have convicted him and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment of 2 years and also to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and undergo a further period of six months imprisonment in default of payment of fine. In respect of enhancement of subsistence allowance Sri V.Suryanarayana is being paid subsistence allowance as per the rules and it is decided that it shall be restricted to 50% only, since he was convicted by the Hon’ble Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Visakhapatnam under P.C. Act. Further there are also many other cases initiated against him for departmental enquiry for the lapses and irregularities committed by him in execution of civil works. Justice Pandu Ranga Rao commission of enquiry has also conducted an enquiry and in the inquiry report Sri V.Suryanarayana was also found to be guilty of serious lapses. For these lapses if and when established Sri V.Suryanarayana will be liable for a major punishment.” 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the order passed by the respondent is not in tune with G.O.Ms.No.526, General Administration (Services C) Department, dated 19.08.2009 and also the directions given by this Court. 6. The adequacy or inadequacy of the reasons for passing the order cannot be decided or tested here. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the reasons assigned in the impugned order for not revoking the suspension the order, the remedy is otherwise. 7. Insofar as subsistence allowance is concerned, for the same reasons the subsistence allowance has not been enhanced. Therefore, the direction in W.P.No.15187 of 2011 dated 08.06.2011, has been complied with and hence, there is no willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court. 8. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed leaving open the remedies available to the petitioner under law. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU, J SEPTEMBER 09, 2011. YVL