THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO CONTEMPT CASE No. 1468 of 2009 O R D E R: This Contempt Case has been filed complaining that the order that was passed in W.P.M.P. No. 15150 of 2009, dated 07.07.2009 is violated by the respondent – Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank. It will be appropriate to notice that an order was passed initially on 19.06.2009 directing the respondent bank not to finalize the selections. However, that order, dated 19.06.2009 was modified on 07.07.2009 finding that the balance of convenience lies in allowing the respondent bank to fill up the posts of Officer Scale-II only with those who are qualified and otherwise eligible/suitable for such promotions. Such of those vacancies which remained unfilled were asked not to be filled up except by way of local arrangement such as in-charge arrangement made in favour of the senior-most employees. The selections, which were to be finalized pursuant to the said order were directed to be abide by the result in the Writ Petition. Now, it is stated that the respondent-bank has initiated process of promotions from the cadre of Officer Scale-I to Officer Scale-II. For undertaking the said process, vacancies as on 31.03.2009 are sought to be filled in by conducting a written examination on 25.10.2009. According to the petitioners, since vacancies existing as of 31.03.2009 are sought to be filled in, it amounts to violation of the order passed by this Court on 07.07.2009. On the other hand, I find that the promotion process which is initiated pursuant to the notice dated 05.09.2009 is entirely an independent exercise. May be the grievance of the petitioners even against this process is identical as the one that is sought to be agitated in the main Writ Petition. Until and unless the said Writ Petition is decided by this Court upholding the contention canvassed by the petitioners, the process of undertaking promotions even against the vacancies that arose in the subsequent period cannot be stalled. I am, therefore, not convinced that it is a fit case to proceed against the respondent bank for contempt of Court action. The Contempt Case is accordingly dismissed. ---------------------------------- (NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J) 18th December 2009 ksld