IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THIS THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE Nos.195, 196 AND 197 OF 2010 AND WRIT PETITION Nos.21340, 21339 AND 21341 OF 2009 CONTEMPT CASE No.195 OF 2010: Between: Sajidullah Men Power Association Rep. by its President. …. Petitioner AND State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Medical Health Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …. Respondents WRIT PETITION No.21340 of 2009: Between: Sajidullah Men Power Association Rep. by its President. …. Petitioner AND State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Medical Health Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …. Respondents CONTEMPT CASE No.196 OF 2010: Between: Sajidullah Men Power Association Rep. by its President. …. Petitioner AND State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Medical Health Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …. Respondents WRIT PETITION No.21339 of 2009: Between: Sajidullah Men Power Association Rep. by its President. …. Petitioner AND State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Medical Health Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …. Respondents CONTEMPT CASE No.197 OF 2010: Between: Sajidullah Men Power Association Rep. by its President. …. Petitioner AND State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Medical Health Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …. Respondents WRIT PETITION No.21341 of 2009: Between: Sajidullah Men Power Association Rep. by its President. …. Petitioner AND State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Medical Health Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE Nos.195, 196 AND 197 OF 2010 AND WRIT PETITION Nos.21340, 21339 AND 21341 OF 2009 WRIT PETITION Nos.21340, 21339 AND 21341 OF 2009: COMMON JUDGMENT: The petitioner in all the matters was selected as an agency to render sanitation services in three different hospitals in the Kurnool District. Alleging that the services rendered by the petitioner are improper and the remuneration to the workers was not paid properly, the respondents terminated his contract before its completion. Challenging the same, these Writ Petitions are filed. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Health & Family Welfare. 3. The contract awarded to the petitioner is for a period of one year. Even if there was any default on the part of the petitioner, the respondents ought to have issued a notice to him before the contract was terminated. However, they have chosen to discontinue the contract of the petitioner two months in advance and entrusted the work to certain other agencies, which cannot be countenanced in law. 4. Inasmuch as the period of contract is only for one year, the loss suffered by the petitioner can be compensated by directing the respondents to continue him as sanitation agency for a period of two months from 01-04-2010 to 31-05-2010. In fact, the respondents have issued orders to that effect, may be without specific dates. By the time the contract comes to an end, the accounts between the petitioner on the one hand and the respondents on the other shall be settled. It shall be open to the respondents to select agency for the subsequent term well in advance by following the procedure. 5. All the Writ Petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs. CONTEMPT CASE Nos.195, 196 AND 197 OF 2010: 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Health & Family Welfare. Respondents also present. 7. In view of the orders passed in Writ Petition Nos.21340, 21339 and 21341 of 2009 and the stand expressed by the respondents in their proceedings dated 19-03-2010, these Contempt Cases are closed. ______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J March 22, 2010. KTL