THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.405 of 2010 Dated 19th January, 2011 Between: Smt. Gamjala Sujatha …Petitioner And The Collector (Civil Supplies), Adilabad and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: None appeared Counsel for respondents: Assistant Government Pleader Civil Supplies The Court made the following: ORDER: This contempt case is filed alleging wilful disobedience on the part of the respondents of the order dated 08.02.2010 in W.P.No.2468 of 2010.0 At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner. I have perused the record. The petitioner filed W.P.No.2468 of 2010 assailing the proceedings dated 30.11.2009 of respondent No.2, whereby he has cancelled the fair price shop authorization held by the petitioner in respect of shop No.1 of Rampur Village, Dilawarpur Mandal, Adilabad District. By order dated 08.02.2010, this Court, while directing notice to the respondents, suspended the impugned proceedings dated 30.11.2009 and directed respondent No.2 to pass appropriate orders permitting the petitioner to discharge her duties as fair price shop dealer. Complaining that this order has not been implemented by respondent No.2, the present Contempt Case is filed. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.2, it is inter alia stated that consequent on cancellation of the petitioner’s authorization, a notification was issued on 24.12.2009 for filling up the vacancy, that interviews were conducted on 24.12.2009 and that one Smt. Kusthapuram Sharada, W/o Ramulu, R/o Ramapur, was selected and appointed as fair price shop dealer under order dated 24.12.2009. Respondent No.2 has, therefore, averred that in the light of the said fact, the petitioner could not be continued as per the direction of this Court. No reply-affidavit is filed controverting the averments contained in the counter-affidavit. I have felt convinced with the explanation submitted by respondent No.2 that non-implementation of the order of this Court is not deliberate and that he has no intention of violating the order of this Court. Therefore, I do not find any reason to hold that respondent No.2 is guilty of committing contempt of order of this Court. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 19th January, 2011 GHN/VJL