THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH CONTEMPAT CASE NO:1731 OF 2010 DATE:30.08.2011 BETWEEN N.BHAKTHAVATSALA RAO …PETITIONER AND SRI IYR.KRISHNA RAO & OTHERS …RESPONDENTS. THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH CONTEMPAT CASE NO:1731 OF 2010 ORDER: The present contempt case is filed by the petitioner seeking to punish the respondents under sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Court Act for non implementation of the order of this Court dated 27.6.2008 passed in W.P.No:2597 of 1999. The writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to re engage him and others as watchmen-cum-attender and absorb them as regular employees of Tirupathi Tirumala Devasthanams with all benefits including the pay scales on par with other employees with effect from the date of their joining with all consequential and attendant benefits. By order dated 27.6.2008, the said writ petition was disposed of directing respondents 1 and 3 to consider the case of the petitioner herein and others taking into consideration section 25 H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and also taking into consideration the proceedings in Roc.No:B7/50013/1997 and in Roc.No:TS3/7532/2006 dated 12.2.2008 and 9.6.2008 respectively issued by the Executive Officer, T.T.Devasthanams, Tirupathi and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four Weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Complaining that the respondents have disobeyed the orders passed by this Court, the present contempt case is filed. In the present contempt case, the 1st respondent has filed the counter affidavit wherein it is stated that in compliance with the order of this Court, an order was passed on 1.10.2008 and communicated to the petitioner by furnishing reasons for not considering his case and that there was no relationship of employee and employer between the petitioner and the respondent and therefore, the provisions of section 25 H of the Act have no application and as such, the contempt case is liable to be dismissed. As could be seen from the counter itself, it is obvious that in pursuance of the order passed by this Court in the writ petition, the authorities have considered the case of the petitioner and passed an order on 1.10.2008 and the same has been communicated to him by furnishing reasons for rejecting his case. If that being the case, the acts of contempt on the part of the respondents as alleged by the petitioner, does not arise and as such, the contempt case is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the contempt case is dismissed. No costs. _________________ Justice G.Chandraiah. Gurc. Date:30.8.2011 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH CONTEMPAT CASE NO:1731 of 2010 DATE:30.08.2011