HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CONTEMPT CASE NOs.388 AND 454 OF 2010 Dt.16.4.2010 C.C.No.388 of 2010 Between: S.Udaya Sankaradu and another .. Petitioners And P.Srinivas, Presently working District Educational Officer, West Godavari District at Eluru & Member Secretary, District Level Committee for Promotional Counselling, West Godavari District at Eluru .. Respondent C.C.No.454 of 2010 S.Umamaheswara Rao and others .. Petitioners And P.Srinivas, Presently working District Educational Officer, West Godavari District at Eluru & Member Secretary, District Level Committee for Promotional Counselling, West Godavari District at Eluru .. Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CONTEMPT CASE NOs.388 AND 454 OF 2010 COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) These two contempt cases are filed alleging that the respondent District Educational Officer-cum-Member Secretary, District Level Committee for Promotional Counselling, West Godavari District, Eluru, has willfully and deliberately violated the orders of this Court dated 9.10.2009 in W.P.No.23955 and 23954 of 2003 respectively. The said writ petitions are filed by the respondent herein aggrieved by the orders of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.Nos.9929 and 9790 of 2002 respectively, dated 1.5.2003. Petitioners herein are applicants in the said O.As., and respondents 9, 10, 4, 7 and 9 respectively in the writ petitions. As the writ petitions filed by the respondent was dismissed as infructuous by order dated 9.10.2009 on the representation made by the learned Additional Advocate General that the applicants were already promoted and therefore the subject matter of the writ petitions has become infructuous. It is stated that in fact the applicants have not been promoted and the representation made by the learned Additional Advocate General is incorrect. The orders of the Tribunal dated 1.5.2003 in O.A.Nos.9790 and 9929 of 2002 have become final and the writ petitions filed by the respondent were dismissed as infructuous. Therefore, it is open for the petitioners to get the said orders of the Tribunal implemented by initiating appropriate contempt proceedings before the Tribunal for violation of its orders. It is stated that the learned Additional Advocate General has filed a review petition, but no such review petition is listed. As we have not passed any orders in the writ petitions except dismissing them as infructuous, it is open for the petitioners to approach the Tribunal. The contempt cases are accordingly dismissed. _________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. __________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J. 16.4.2010 kpr