HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU C.C. No. 183 of 2009 DATED: 08.02.2010 Between: P. Venkateswarulu .. Petitioner And K. Ram Gopal and another .. Respondents O R D E R:- This Contempt Case is filed alleging willful disobedience on the part of the respondents in complying with the order dated 26.11.2007 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 24902 of 2007, whereby the respondents were directed to complete the enquiry, within a period of three months from the date of that order, and if the enquiry is not completed within three months, the respondents shall reinstate the petitioner into service. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that in spite of the directions given by this Court in W.P. No.24902 of 2007, the respondents have neither completed the enquiry nor reinstated the petitioner into service, and therefore, prays that the respondents may be punished for willful contempt of the orders passed by this Court. It appears that Domestic Enquiry Officer issued Notice dated 21.11.2007, which was challenged by the petitioner in W.P. No.26955 of 2007, and this Court, by order dated 11.02.2008, disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to file a representation to the 2nd respondent enumerating the documents required by him such as list of witnesses and documents relied upon by Jaladanki Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society Limited, within a period of four weeks, and on such representation being filed, the 2nd respondent shall furnish copies of such documents, and if no representation is filed by the petitioner within the stipulated period, it shall be presumed that the petitioner is not interested in participating the enquiry and the respondents are at liberty to proceed with the matter as per law. After disposal of W.P. No.26955 of 2007, the petitioner submitted his explanation to the notice, and ultimately, his services were terminated on 09.09.2009, and when the termination order was sent to the petitioner, he did not receive it. Then, the respondents took substitute service of notice on 19.10.2009 by way of getting it published in Sri Pottisriramulu Nellore District Editions of both “Andhra Bhoomi” and “Andhra Prabha” Telugu Dailies. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, nothing survives in this Contempt Case for further adjudication. The Contempt Case is accordingly closed. However, it is always open for the petitioner to challenge the order of termination, dated 09.09.2009 by working out his remedies as may be available to him under law. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that copy of the order, dated 09.09.2009 terminating the services of the petitioner has not been served on the petitioner. Hence, the respondents are directed to furnish a copy of the order of termination to the petitioner, if he applies for it. No costs. ______________ C.V. RAMULU, J 8th February, 2010 Note: Furnish copy in a week B/o bcj