Telangana High Court
B.Sridhara Chakravarthi vs Sri. Anmaneni Gopal Rao on 2 February, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
CONTEMPT CASE No.2259 OF 2023
AND
I.A.No.1 of 2023
IN
WRIT PETITION No.20499 OF 2011
COMMON ORDER :
This Contempt Case is filed by the petitioner under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Court Act, 1971 seeking to punish the respondents herein for wilfully violating the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.20499 of 2011, dated 02.11.2022.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Priyanka Singh, learned counsel representing on behalf of Smt.Udayasree, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not technically literate to understand the opinion of this Court and therefore, he could not file an application in terms of the orders passed by this Court. They have already filed an application to implement the order of this Court. Taking objection to the same, Smt.Priyanka Singh, learned counsel representing on behalf of Smt.Udayasree, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4 submitted that unless and until an application in terms of the order passed by this Court is filed, respondents could not proceed further and also while drawing the attention of this Court to the I.A.No.1 of 2023, would submit that as Page 2 of 3 per Rule 14 of the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board Employees' Discipline and Appeal Regulations, as adopted by the TSNPDCL provided for a review and would submit that unless and until this Court passed the appropriate direction clarifying the said Rule and direct the petitioner to submit the application before the appellate authority and it would be considered in accordance with Rule.14 of the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board Employees' Discipline and Appeal Regulations.
4. As per Rule 14(A)(ii), the respondents are very well within the knowledge of issuance of order as stated above. It is not necessary to give any clarification as the petitioner is illiterate to understand the rule to suit their case and instead of dragging this matter for clarification, the respondents are directed to act in accordance with the law upon the application being moved by the petitioner by giving an undertaking in spite of intimation of the order of this Court and thereby to comply with the order/direction passed by this Court in Writ Petition in spite of protracting the matter for longer time. Since the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time to facilitate the petitioner to make an application in terms of the order to exercise their discretion in terms of Rule-14 (A) of the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board Employees' Discipline and Appeal Regulations and to conduct the enquiry afresh in Page 3 of 3 accordance with Law, this Court does not see any further reason to continue the Contempt Case proceedings.
5. Accordingly, this contempt case is closed. I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.20499 of 2011 shall stands dismissed. No costs.
____________________ E.V.VENUGOPAL, J Dated :02.02.2024 pgp