THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CONTEMPT CASE No.1579 OF 2010 ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed, under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondents for deliberately and willfully flouting and disobeying the order of this Court, dated 02.07.2010, passed in W.P.MP.No.19483 of 2010 in W.P.No.15466 of 2010. 2. The interim order, dated 02.07.2010, in W.P.MP.No.19483 of 2010 in W.P.No.15466 of 2010, reads as follows: “There shall be interim direction to the respondents to consider regularization of the services of the petitioners from 01.08.2002 on par with the employees who were appointed along with them in pursuance of notification dated 10.10.1999, if the petitioners are otherwise eligible as per law, and pass appropriate orders, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Notice.” 3. In pursuance of the notice, the respondent – corporation filed counter affidavit stating that the competent authority accorded permission to regularize the services of 78 Casual Drivers who have completed 240 working days based on schedules as on 31.07.2002 and passed the orders, dated 25.11.2010, rejecting the case of the petitioners as they are not eligible for regularization with effect from 01.08.2002. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that there is no direction given by this Court to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization of their services, if the petitioners have completed 240 working days based on schedules as on 31.07.2002 and therefore, the respondents committed willful disobedience of the interim order passed by this Court. 5. On the other hand, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents contended that the cases of the petitioners have been considered in accordance with the Rules and Regulations governing the service conditions of the petitioners; that the petitioners have not completed 240 working days as on 31.07.2002 and so, their services have not been regularized; and that if the petitioners are aggrieved by the order, dated 25.11.2010, passed by the Regional Manger, Hyderabad Region, rejecting their case, they have to challenge the same. 6. For violating the orders of this Court, there must be a willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court. This Court has not given any positive direction to the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners along with other employees. The direction given to the respondents is to consider the case of regularization of the services of the petitioners on par with other employees, if the petitioners are otherwise eligible as per law. In pursuance of the said direction, the Regional Manager, Hyderabad Region, passed the order, dated 25.11.2010, stating that the services of Casual Drivers have been regularized, who have completed 240 working days based on schedule as on 31.07.2002 with effect from 01.08.2002 and as the petitioners have not completed 240 working days based on schedule as on 31.07.2002, their cases have been rejected. 7. According to the respondents, the petitioners have not completed 240 working days as on 31.07.2002. When the petitioners have not completed 240 working days, as on 31.07.2002, the question of regularization of their services does not arise. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the order of the Regional Manager, dated 25.11.2010, they have to challenge the said proceedings. As there is no willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court, the question of punishing the respondents does not arise. The Contempt Case is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 8. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J June 06, 2011 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CONTEMPT CASE No.1579 OF 2010 Between: G. Srinivas and others .....PETITIONERS AND Sri Lakshmi Partha Sarathi and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CONTEMPT CASE No.1579 OF 2010 June 06, 2011