THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE NO.279 OF 2010 Dated 8th July, 2010 Between: G.Anantha Singh …Petitioner And V.C.Malleswara Rao and another …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : None appeared Counsel for the respondents: Sri P.R.Balarami Reddy The Court made the following ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed alleging wilful disobedience of order dated 07.04.2009 in WPMP No.9298 of 2009 in W.P.No.7105 of 2009. The petitioner in this Contempt Case filed W.P.No.7105 of 2009 for a Certiorari to quash memo dated 20.03.2009, whereby his provisional pension was withheld. This Court, by order dated 07.04.2009, suspended the said order. Alleging wilful disobedience of the said order, the petitioner filed the present Contempt Case. It is alleged in the Contempt Case that even though more than five months had elapsed from the time of passing of the order by this Court, the respondents have not paid the provisional pension. This Court admitted the Contempt Case on 30.04.2010 and in compliance with the notice of their appearance, both the respondents have appeared before the Court and respondent No.2 filed a counter-affidavit. It is explained in the counter-affidavit that after the passing of the order, by this Court on 07.04.2009, he has addressed letter dated 04.05.2009 to the Special Chief Secretary to Government with a request to advise for further course of action; that the Government vide its letter dated 10.07.2009 advised the respondent to file a counter and vacate stay petition and that a vacate stay petition was filed on 30.07.2009, which was adjourned from time to time and the same was finally dismissed on 30.04.2010. It is further stated that the legal adviser has intimated about the dismissal of the vacate stay petition, vide his letter dated 02.05.2010, and advised to implement the orders of the Court. That the file was again processed to the Special Chief Secretary to the Government through letter dated 22.05.2010 and the Principal Secretary to Government through his letter dated 07.06.2010 instructed the respondent to comply with the order of this Court. Respondent No.2 has also filed an additional counter-affidavit, wherein, while reiterating the contents of his counter-affidavit, he has offered unconditional apology. From the contents of the counter-affidavit and the additional counter-affidavit, it is evident that the respondents failed to implement the order of this Court by showing reasonable dispatch. From the different dates referred to in the counter-affidavit, it is clear that the respondents have taken their own time in implementing the order of this Court. Even after the vacate stay petition was dismissed, instead of straightaway implementing the order of this Court, they have written to the Government for its purported clearance. Therefore, this Court is not satisfied with the manner in which the respondents have treated the order of this Court. However, as the respondents have purged the contempt by implementing the order though belatedly and offering unconditional apology, this Court does not propose to proceed against them further. The Contempt Case is accordingly closed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 8th July, 2010 vrn