THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU CONTEMPT CASE No.1068 of 2009 ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed complaining willful disobedience on the part of the respondents in complying with the order, dated 31.12.2008, passed by this Court in W.P.M.P.No.31068 of 2008 in W.P.No.23832 of 2008, whereunder the respondents were directed to consider the representations purported to have been made by the petitioner on 31.01.2006 and 16.02.2008. When the matter had come up earlier, the learned Government Pleader submitted that the respondents have complied with the aforesaid orders of this Court by issuing speaking orders vide proceedings dated 09.08.2009 explaining the reasons as to why the petitioner’s case was not considered. However, since the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the respondents have not considered the case of the petitioner by taking into consideration the documents submitted by the petitioner, this Court orally suggested the learned Government Pleader to advise the respondents to re-consider the case of the petitioner by taking into consideration the documents submitted by the petitioner. Today, the learned Government Pleader submits that pursuant to his suggestion to the respondents to pass fresh speaking orders considering the documents submitted by the petitioner, the respondents have considered the case of the petitioner and issued proceedings dated 16.10.2009 rejecting the claim of the petitioner. A copy of the said proceedings issued by the 1st respondent is also placed before this Court. Now, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondents have not considered the case of the petitioner in proper perspective and have not implemented the orders of this Court in its true spirit. The said aspect cannot be gone into by this Court in a contempt case like this. Since the respondents have considered the case of the petitioner and passed a detailed order, it cannot be said that they have disobeyed the orders of this Court. Thus, nothing survives in this contempt case for further adjudication and the contempt case is liable to be closed. Accordingly, the contempt case is closed. However, this will not preclude the petitioner from working out the appropriate remedies as available to him under the law. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 02.11.2009 v v