The court closed a contempt case filed for violation of an order regarding regularization of suspension. The 1st Respondent filed a memo confirming the suspension period was treated as spent on duty, satisfying the impugned order.
Contempt case closed; no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR
CONTEMPT CASE No.999 of 2021
ORDER:-
The present Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondents, for willful and deliberate violation of the Order, dated 03.02.2020, passed in W.P.No.36301 of 2018, which is as under:
” …directing the 1st respondent to take further action and pass appropriate orders regularizing the suspension period of the petitioner and granting consequential benefits, keeping in view the judgment referred above and also the fact that the petitioner was acquitted from criminal case.
The writ petition, with the above direction, is disposed of….”
“In the reference 11th cited, orders were issued to Sri M. Srinivasulu Naidu, Ex-AE/O/RURALS Section/Nandikotkur dropping further action in C.C.No.23 of 2015 and regularizing the suspension period from 28.05.2014 to 26.07.2015 as leave which he is eligible limiting the pay and allowance to the subsistence allowance already paid subject to outcome of criminal appeal No.1388 of 2017 pending in Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
2
2. During the hearings held on 09.11.2021 in C.C.No.999 of 2021, the Hon’ble High Court of A.P. has observed that in absence of any order in Criminal Appeal, prima-facie there is no justification to withhold the payments as ordered in the writ petition.
3. In view of the above, the Chairman and Managing Director/APSPDCL, who is the disciplinary authority has reconsidered the issue and decided to treat the period of suspension from 28.05.2014 to 26.07.2015 as spent on duty, subject to outcome of criminal Appeal No.1388 of 2017 pending in the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
4. Accordingly, in continuation to the orders issued in the reference 11th cited, it is ordered that, the suspension period from 28.05.2014 to 26.07.2015 undergone by Sri M. Srinivasulu Naidu, Ex-AE/O/Rural Section/Nandikotkur, Kurnool District (Now Dy.EE/Operation/Kalyandurgam) is treated as spent on duty with a condition that the same will be reviewed basing on the outcome of pending criminal Appeal No.1388 of 2017 before Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh”.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this
Contempt Case shall stand closed.
_ ______________________________ JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR
Date: 29.11.2021
MS
3
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR
CONTEMPT CASE No.999 of 2021
Date: 29.11.2021
MS
Petitioner
1st Respondent
M. Srinivasulu Naidu
C. Praveen Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
