HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Contempt Case No.724 of 2011 Date: 04-7-2011 Between A.Dasharatham … Petitioner and Sri B.Prasad Rao, I.P.S., Managing Director, APSRTC, Musheerabad, Hyderabad-20 and 3 others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Contempt Case No.724 of 2011 Judgment: The 1st respondent-Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation issued recruitment notification on 13-11-2010 inviting applications for filling up of the posts of Mechanics and Artisans. As per the said notification, the required qualification is I.T.I. in the relevant Trade and that the applicants should possess “Wiremen Competency Certificate”. The petitioner approached this Court complaining that he was not being issued call letter on the ground that he did not produce the said certificate. This Court by interim orders dated 29-01-2011 directed the respondents 2 to 5 to issue call letter to the petitioner to attend the interview without insisting for production of the said certificate and that the petitioner should submit the same at the time of his interview. Accordingly, the petitioner was given a call letter and interview was conducted on 26-4-2011. On production of the aforesaid certificate, the respondents considered and found it to be not acceptable. Therefore, orders were passed by the 3rd respondent on 27-4-2011 finding that the petitioner was not qualified for the said post. The petitioner has filed this contempt case alleging that the said orders are not legal. 2. This Court by interim orders dated 29-01-2011 in W.P.M.P.No.1785 of 2011 in W.P.No.1457 of 2011 merely directed that the petitioner shall be given call letter and should be permitted to attend the interview without insisting for production of “Wiremen Competency Certificate” and he was permitted to produce the said certificate at the time of his interview. Accordingly, the respondents complied with the said order and allowed the petitioner to appear for the interview. Therefore, it cannot be said that the respondents disobeyed the orders of this Court and therefore, I am not inclined to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 27-4-2011 if he is so aggrieved, in accordance with law. 3. In the result, the contempt case is dismissed. ___________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 04th July, 2011. Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Contempt Case No.724 of 2011 04th July, 2011.