THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.1639 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner responded to a notification issued way back in the year 2007 inviting applications for selection of candidates for the post of Anganwadi Workers for Kandlapalli Village, Sarangapur Mandal, Karimnagar District. T.Srilatha was placed at Serial No.1 and the petitioner at Serial No.2 in the selection list. It is stated that on a complaint submitted by the petitioner, the appointment of Srilatha was set aside. Complaining that she is not being appointed in the resultant vacancy, the petitioner filed W.P.No.18437 of 2011. The writ petition was disposed of on 17.08.2011, directing that in case the petitioner is placed at Serial No.2, her case shall be considered for appointment against the vacancy. This contempt case is filed alleging that the respondents did not comply with the directions issued by this Court. A counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents. It is admitted that the appointment of T.Srilatha was set aside on a complaint made by the petitioner. It is, however, stated that Srilatha filed W.P.No.16058 of 2011 challenging the proceedings, dated 09.06.2011, and that the writ petition was allowed on 22.06.2011. It is stated that C.C.No.1472 of 2011 was filed alleging that the orders passed in W.P.No.16058 of 2011 were not implemented and that Srilatha has since been reinstated. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. The very basis for the relief granted in favour of the petitioner was that the appointment of candidate at Serial No.1 i.e. Srilatha was set aside and that the post is vacant. The facts mentioned above disclose that though the appointment of candidate at Serial No.1 was set aside, this Court allowed W.P.No.16058 of 2011 filed by her and as a result of the steps taken by her, she has since been reinstated. In view of this development, the petitioner cannot be considered for appointment. In case the petitioner wants, she has to pursue the remedies vis-à-vis the appointment of candidate at Serial No.1. The contempt case is accordingly closed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:29.12.2011. kdl