IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTISIXTH DAYOF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH CONTEMPT CASE No. 1144 OF 2009 IN WP.No. 18802 of 2005 Between: Amancha Somanatham s/o late Mallaiah Aged 66 years, r/o H.No. 24-4-351, Darga Kazipet, Warangal, Warangal district, ..... PETITIONER V/s. National Institute of Technology, Kazipet , Represented by its director, Sri Y. Venkateshwar Rao, s/o Y.Surya Narayana, aged about 50 years, R/o NIT Office Complex, Kazipet, Warangal district. … RESPONDENT The Court made the following : (Order follows 2nd page) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH CONTEMPT CASE NO. 1144 of 2009 IN WRIT PETITION No. 18802 OF 2005 O R D E R : It is submitted by the counsel for the respondent that the order passed by this court has been complied by issuing appropriate proceedings in the matter. 2. The contempt case is filed complaining that the respondent-institution failed to comply with the order of this court dated 18-10-2009 made in WP.No.18802 of 2005. 3. The petitioner herein filed the above writ petition seeking for issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to implement the scheme of compassionate appointment if necessary by creating supernumerary post to accommodate the son of the petitioner, Amancha Vishnu Prasad. 4. By order dated 18-10-2008, this court disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground in respect of the petitioner’s son who is dependant of the employee of the respondent- institution, who retired on medical invalidation in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 5. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent- institution placed before this court, the proceedings in RC.No.AD- 3/209-10/3370, National Institute of Technology, Warangal, dated 18- 2-2010, issued by the Director of National Institute of Technology, Warangal i.e., the respondent institution, where the case of the petitioner was considered and rejected observing that the case of the petitioner will be considered as and when any suitable vacancy arises against the sanctioned posts in future. 6. Sri Bankatlal Mandhani, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that liberty may be given to the petitioner to challenge the validity of the said proceedings. 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and having regard to the submissions made on either side, the contempt case is dismissed in view of the fact that in compliance with the order passed by this court, the respondent-institution has issued the aforesaid proceedings. But, however, dismissal of this contempt case does not come in the way of the petitioners in questioning the validity of the above proceedings dated 18-2-2010. 8. The contempt case is accordingly dismissed. However, in the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ Justice G. Chandraiah 26-02-2010. I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH CONTEMPT CASE No. 1141 of 2009 Circulation Entry No.44 Date: 26-02-2010 COMPUTER No. 43 Court Master: I s L