IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND NINE ONLY CONTEMPT CASE No.1046 of 2009 Between: Smt.C.Mahadevi and five others. …Petitioners And: Sri I.Y.Krishna Rao, Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, Tirumala, Chittoor District. …Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Ghanta Rama Rao Counsel for the Respondents: Sri Y.V.Ravi Prasad. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Contempt Case is filed alleging willful disobedience of order, dated 24-10-2006, in Writ Petition No.18939 of 1995. On the previous occasion, the learned counsel for the respondents placed before the Court, proceedings, dated 9-10- 2009, wherein the order of this Court was purported to be implemented. When this Court pointed out that denial of pay scales, with effect from the period specified, is not in accordance with the order of this Court, the learned counsel has taken adjournment to take corrective steps. Accordingly, today, Sri Y.V.Ravi Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent, placed before the Court, proceedings dated 6-11- 2009, wherein it is mentioned as under: “ In slight modification of orders issued in Proceedings 2nd read above, in pursuant to the Hon’ble High Court orders dt.24-10-2006 in W.P.No.18939/95, the following is ordered: ‘The services of the address entry petitioners 1 to 15 are hereby regularized as Sweepers and the petitioners 16 & 17 as Gardeners in the scale of pay of Rs.290-425 attached to the last grade service w.e.f. the date of their initial engagement in TTD and extended all benefits, pecuniary and otherwise, accruing there from (instead of from the date of orders as issued in Procgs dt.09-10-2009) subject to disposal of the Writ Appeal No.320/2009 filed by TTD’. The Spl Gr.Dy.Exe.Officer (Services), TTD, Health Officer, TTD, Tirumala, and the Garden Superintendent, TTD, Tirumala, are requested to make a note of the above change and take necessary further action in the matter and report compliance”. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that with the above mentioned proceedings, the grievance of the petitioners stood redressed. Therefore, the Contempt Case is disposed of as infructuous. ----------------------------- ------- C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:06-11-2009 MNR