HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Contempt Case No.780 of 2010 Date: July 2, 2010 Between: T. Rojaramani, W/o.Ramchander, Aged about 30 years, Occ: Field- Assistant, Uthloor village, and 14 others … Petitioners And Sri Suresh Kumar, District Collector, Medak District, at Sanga Reddy, and 3 others … Respondents Order: Non-compliance of order dated 30-03-2010, passed by this court in W.P.No.6905 of 2010, by the respondents, is the complaint in this contempt case filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. In the writ petition, it was the grievance of the petitioners that though they were appointed as Field Assistants and their appointments were in force, they were not being allowed to function as such. This court, by order dated 30-03-2010, while issuing notice before admission, directed that if the appointments of the petitioners were in force as on the date of passing of the order, they shall be allowed to function as Field Assistants on the same terms and conditions of appointments. In this contempt case, third respondent-Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Shankarampet(A) Mandal, Medak District, has filed counter affidavit on behalf of respondents. It is stated in the counter affidavit that in compliance of the order of this court dated 30-03-2010, proceedings No.EGS/2/2010, dated 23-06-2010 were issued directing the petitioners to report to their duties, pursuant to which they have reported to their duties and are being continued as Field Assistants. Though there was some delay on the part of the respondents in complying the directions of this court, fact remains that the directions of this court in the order dated 30-03-2010 have been complied with by the respondents and to that effect proceedings dated 23-06-2010 have been issued, as evident from the counter affidavit, and the petitioners are being continued as Field Assistants. In that view of the matter, this court is of the view, it is not a fit case to proceed further under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The contempt case is accordingly closed. ____________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) July 2, 2010 MRR