IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH CONTEMPT CASE NO:1300 OF 2009 DATED:30.7.2010 Between: A.Someswaram .....PETITIONER AND Smt.B.Uday Lakshmi, IAS, Vice Chairman & Managing Director, and another. .....RESPONDENTs This Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH CONTEMPT CASE NO:1300 OF 2009 ORDER: This contempt case is filed by the petitioner seeking to punish the respondents under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act for willful and deliberate violation of the order of this Court dated 29.9.2008 in W.P.No:21567 of 1999. The facts leadings to filing of the present contempt case is that the petitioner filed the writ petition seeking for issuance of writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioner in the 1st respondent- Corporation by the 2nd respondent by Lr.No:545/CS.II/99-2, dated 9.7.1999 as arbitrary, illegal, improper and incorrect and consequently, to direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner from the date of his appointment i.e., 25.11.1988. By order dated 29.9.2008, this Court disposed of the writ petition with the following direction: “In view of the above facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. Consequently, the 1st respondent shall consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.12.1995 and send the proposals with all the necessary service particulars of the petitioner to the 2nd respondent within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and the 2nd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders within a period of two months thereafter.” Alleging violation of the above order the present contempt case is filed. In this regard, on behalf of Respondents-1 and 2, a counter affidavit has been filed separately. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the Government issued G.O.Ms.No:89, Consumer Affairs Food and Civil Supplies (CS-I) Department, dated 12.10.2009 in compliance with the order of this Court passed in W.P.No:21567 of 1999, the said G.O is not in conformity with the order of this Court on the ground that the said G.O is issued contrary to the factual aspects considered by this Court. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the order passed by this Court in W.P.No:21567 of 1999 is only to the extent of considering the case of the petitioner by directing the 1st Respondent to consider the representation dated 17.12.1995 and send the proposals with all the necessary service particulars of the petitioner to the 2nd respondent within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and also directing the 2nd respondent to consider the same and pass appropriate orders within a period of two months thereafter. It is further submitted that in compliance with the order of this Court, the Government has considered the issue and issued G.O.Ms.No:89,Consumer Affairs Food and Civil Supplies (CS-I) Department, dated 12.10.2009 and therefore, there is no contempt as alleged by the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents, I am of the view that the issuance of G.O.Ms.No:89, Consumer Affairs Food and Civil Supplies (CS-I) Department, dated 12.10.2009, can be construed as a compliance to the order of this Court passed in W.P.No:21567 of 1999, dated 29.9.2008 and as such, the question of alleged violation of the orders, does not arise. Accordingly, this contempt case is dismissed. However, it is open for the petitioner to question virus of the G.O.Ms.No:89, Consumer Affairs Food and Civil Supplies (CS-I) Department, dated 12.10.2009. No order as to the costs. ____________________ Justice G.Chandraiah Date:30.7.2010 gurc THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH CONTEMPT CASE NO:1300 OF 2009 DATED:30.7.2010