THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Contempt Case No.1774 of 2010 Date:09th December, 2011 Between: V.S.R.Subramanyam S/o.Late Uma Maheswara Sastry ..... Petitioner AND Sri D.Sambasiva Rao, State of A.P., rep. by its Secretary to Government, Education Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad & Ors. .....Respondents *** THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Contempt Case No.1774 of 2010 JUDGMENT: This Contempt Case has been filed by the petitioner complaining disobedience of the order, dated 16.08.2010, passed in W.P.No.21411 of 2001. 2. Notice to the respondents came to be ordered on 16.12.2010. The respondents filed counter affidavit. Thereafter, the petitioner filed reply affidavit. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Higher Education appearing for the respondents. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondents have considered regularization of some of the part time lecturers even though they have not fulfilled the conditions stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.328, Education (CE.III) Department, dated 15.10.1997 and therefore, the petitioner also deserves the regularization of his services on par with them. A further submission has been made that the petitioner submitted a representation, dated 08.11.2011, to consider his case on par with A.Malathi and others and therefore, necessary direction is required to be given to the respondents to consider the said representation. 5. The direction given by this Court in Writ Petition No.21411 of 2001 to the respondents is to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services as Junior Lecturer against the aided vacancy of Zoology in the B.V.K. Junior College, Dwarakanagar, Visakhapatnam-3rd respondent. Pursuant to the direction given by this Court in the Writ Petition, the respondents considered the case of the petitioner and issued Memo.No.13850/IE.II-1/2011, dated 05.10.2011. Relevant portion of the said memo reads as hereunder: “Government after detailed examination of the case keeping in view the directions of the Hon’ble High Court dated 16.8.2010 in W.P.No.21411 of 2001, cannot consider regularization of the services of Sri V.S.R.Subrahmanyam, P.T.J.L. in Zoology in BVK Junior College, Vizag, as per the scheme of regularization persons who have worked in Private Aided Colleges are only eligible. Since Sri V.S.R. Subrahmanyam, P.T.J.L., in Zoology in BVK Junior College, Vizag, has not worked in the Private Aided College and has not fulfilled the condition of completion of 360 days in 3 academic years as on 30.7.1991, or 600 days in 5 academic years as on 25.11.1993 in the aided Junior College laid down in G.O.Ms.No.328, HE.(CE.III) Department, dated 15.10.1997 though the petitioner is deemed to be in service as on 15.10.1997 as per Hon’ble High Court orders dated 16.8.2010 and therefore, the request of the individual is hereby rejected.” 6. It is not the case of the petitioner that he has fulfilled the conditions stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.328, Education (CE.III) Department, dated 15.10.1997. According to the petitioner, he submitted a representation, dated 08.11.2011, to consider his case on par with A.Malathi and others. The direction given in the Writ Petition is to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services as Junior Lecturer against the aided vacancy of Zoology in BVK Junior College, Dwarakanagar, Visakhapatnam-3rd respondent. The respondents considered the case of the petitioner and issued memo, dated 05.10.2011. Reasons have been assigned by the respondents for not considering the case of the petitioner for regularization. The issuance of memo, dated 05.11.2011, by the respondents amounts to substantial compliance of the directions given by this Court in Writ Petition No.21411 of 2001. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the memo, dated 05.10.2011, he is at liberty to challenge the same. It is stated that the petitioner submitted a representation, dated 08.11.2011, to consider his case on par with A.Malathi and other. I hope and trust the respondents will consider the representation, dated 08.11.2011, submitted by the petitioner and communicate the out come of the same to him. 7. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:09th December, 2011. Note: Issue C.C. within a week. B/O cs THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Contempt Case No.1774 of 2010 Date:09th December, 2011