THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY CONTEMPT CASE NO.1023 OF 2009 Dated 11th September, 2009 Between: K.Raja Gopal Reddy and another …Petitioners And General Manager, District Cooperative Central Bank Limited and another …Respondents The Court made the following O R D E R: This Contempt Case, under Sections 12 to 14 of the Contempt of Courts Act, is filed alleging that the respondents have not complied with the directions issued by this Court in the order dated 08.10.2007 passed in WPMP No.27593 of 2007 in W.P.No.21275 of 2007. The petitioners are the members of the fourth respondent- Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Aspari, Kurnool District. In the writ petition, it is their case that they are entitled for waiver of interest as per the Circular Instructions dated 19.10.2006, notified by the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (for short “NABARD”). By order dated 08.10.2007, in the writ petition, this Court granted an interim direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for waiver of interest as per the relief measures notified by the Circular dated 19.10.2006. In this Contempt Case, it is the case of the petitioners that in spite of such a direction, respondents have not yet taken any action to consider their claims for waiver of interest. A detailed counter-affidavit is filed by the General Manager of the District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, Kurnool District-the second respondent, wherein it is stated that pursuant to the directions of this Court, the second respondent addressed letter dated 12.02.2008, to the Andhra Pradesh State Cooperative Bank Limited, Hyderabad-the first respondent forwarding the claims of the petitioners for waiver of interest. Since, the first respondent has no authority to independently decide the claims for waiver of interest, it forwards the claims to NABARD. But, it did not forward the claims of the petitioners herein sent to it by the second respondent to NABARD, on the ground that the proposals were not sent by him in the prescribed format. It is further stated that the second respondent, therefore, again by letter dated 18.08.2009, forwarded the claims of the petitioners to the first respondent in the prescribed format and the first respondent, in turn, forwarded the same to NABARD. Though there is some delay in forwarding the claims of the petitioners for consideration, but in view of the explanation offered by the second respondent in the counter-affidavit, it cannot be said that there is any wilful or deliberate violation of the directions issued by this Court. In this view of the matter, inasmuch as the second respondent has already forwarded to the first respondent the claims of the petitioners for waiver of interest in the prescribed format and the first respondent, in turn, forwarded the same to NABARD for consideration, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case to interfere with under the Contempt of Courts Act. For the aforesaid reasons, the Contempt Case is closed. No order as to costs. __________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J Dated 11th September, 2009 vrn