THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE NO.1473 OF 2009 ORDER: This Contempt Case has been filed complaining the disobedience of the order dated 06.03.2009 passed in Writ Petition No.4678 of 2009. Notice before admission came to be ordered on 27.10.2009. Respondent entered appearance through a counsel and filed counter. It is stated in the counter that the explanation submitted by the petitioner has been considered and proceedings have been issued on 09.04.2009. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondent issued proceedings without taking into consideration the explanation submitted by the petitioner and it amounts to violation of he order dated 06.03.2009 in W.P.No.4678 of 2009. Learned counsel laid much emphasis on Item No.10 of the Reference documents cited in proceedings dated 09.04.2009. By referring Reference Document No.10, learned counsel contends that the Depot Manager, Rani Ganj Depot, received the explanation on 30.04.2009, in which case, the assertion of the Depot Manager that he considered the explanation of the petitioner does not stand to reason. On hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, I directed the learned counsel for the respondent to place on record, the entire file relatable to the proceedings dated 09.04.2009. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the respondent placed on record the entire file. As seen from the file, the Depot Manager received the explanation of the petitioner on 16.03.2009. The Depot Manager referred the explanation of the petitioner in proceedings dated 09.04.2009 and after considering the explanation, issued the proceedings dated 09.04.2009. Therefore, it cannot be said the proceedings dated 09.04.2009 are issued without considering the explanation of the petitioner. The petitioner failed to substantiate his contention that the respondent issued the proceedings dated 09.04.2009 in violation of the order dated 06.03.2009 passed in W.P.No.4678 of 2009. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings issued by the authorities, he is at liberty to take recourse available under Regulation 22 of the APSRTC Classification, Control and Appeal Regulations, 1967. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. _______________________ (B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J) 2nd March 2010 RRB