THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH C.C.No.86 of 2010 ORDER: This contempt case has been filed seeking to initiate action against the respondents under Section 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for not implementing the orders of this Court passed in W.P. No.17473 of 2007, dated 03.09.2007 and punish the respondents, in accordance with law. The case of the petitioners is that they filed W.P. No.17473 of 2007 on the grievance that they were interviewed on 14.04.2007 by the respondents for considering their case for appointment to the post of contract Junior Lineman under ST category, but they were not given any appointment orders. This Court on 03.09.2007, while disposing of the writ petition, directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for being appointed to the post of contract Junior Lineman in ST category or in any other category, if they are otherwise eligible, as per law, within a period of six weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and communicate the same to the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after passing the order in W.P. No.17473 of 2007, the petitioners have approached the respondents number of times with a request to appoint them in the clear vacancy, but the respondents deliberately prolonged the time by giving wrong advice that the file is sent to head office for implementation of the orders passed by this Court. Thereafter, the petitioners came to know that the respondents have not taken any steps to comply with the order passed by this Court in the said writ petition and no communication is given to them in compliance of the order passed by this Court. Hence, the present contempt case. On behalf of the respondents counter affidavit has been filed based on which, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that out of 398 number of posts of JLM (c ) in the Karimnagar Circle 333 posts were filled as per the roaster vide proceedings dated 16.11.2007 and 18.12.2007 with the presently working contract labour. However, remaining 65 posts would be filled up with the fresh candidates on the basis of merit by conducting interviews. Since the petitioners did not come under the category of presently working contract labour, they were not selected in that category. However, the candidature of the petitioners would be examined along with others in the category of fresh candidates as per the merit and roaster. Accordingly, necessary speaking orders dated 21.01.2008 were communicated to the petitioners analyzing the reasons for rejection of their cases. Therefore, the respondents have complied with the order passed by this Court. As the learned counsel for the respondents submits that in compliance with the order passed by this Court, they have considered the case of the petitioners and rejected treating them as fresh candidates as they are not coming under the category of presently working category. Further, the case of the petitioners would also be considered on the basis of the merit as per roaster under the category of fresh candidates along with others. In that view of the matter, I do not see any reason to say that there is any violation of the orders passed by this Court and this petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this contempt case is dismissed. However, it is open for the petitioners to challenge the letter dated 21.01.2008, if so advised. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 11.04.2011 LSK