Jurreddi Udaya Sri Vs Ms Kritika Sukla

Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may be pleased to summon the Contemnor/Respondent to punish the respondent under Sections 10 to 12 of the contempt of court Acts, 1971, who are wilfully and deliberately violating the orders^{ofthisHon’bleCourtin} WP No. 6298 of 2024 dated 12'^ Day of March 2024.

¶10

Between:

¶11

Jurreddi Udaya Sri, D/o V.V. Satyanaraya Rao, Aged about 56 years, Occ: Junior Lecturer in Library Science, Place of Work: Government Junior College (B), Kovvuru - W.G District- AP - 533018.

¶12

Government Junior Lecturers in Library Science Association - Andhra Pradesh- Regd. No. 180/2014, Registered Address - Flat No.406, Sri Shiva Homes, Velangini Nagar 3'"'^ Land, Amaravathi Road, Guntur522007 Represented by its Associate President S. Ramesh Babu, Aged about 51 years Occ: Junior Lecturer in Library Science, Place of Work: Government Junior College, Siripuram - Guntur^District-AP

¶13

...PETITIONERS

¶14

AND

¶15

Ms. Kritika Sukla, Director of Intermediate Education,^{AndhraPradesh} Board of Secondary and Intermediate Education, Tadepalli, Guntur District.

¶16

...RESPONDENT

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI TAGORE YADAV YARAGORLA Counsel for the Respondent: SRI RAMALINGESWARA RAO KOCHARLA KOTA

¶18

The Court made the following ORDER :

/ / /

APHC010123392025

iL>

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶23

[3328]

¶24

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶25

TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶26

PRESENT

¶27

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD

¶28

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 838/2025

¶29

Between:

¶30

1.JURREDDI UDAYA SRI D/0 V.V. SATYANARAYA RAO AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR LECTURER IN LIBRARY SCIENCE, PLACE OF WORK GOVERNMENT JUNIOR COLLEGE{B) KOVVURU-W.G DISTRICT-AP-533018

¶31

2.GOVERNMENT JUNIOR LECTURERS IN LIBRARY SCIENCE ASSOCIATION-, ANDHRA PRADESHREGD. NO, 180/2014, REGISTERED ADDRESS - FLAT NO. 406, SRI SHIVA HOMES, VELANGINI NAGAR 3RD LAND, AMARAVATHI ROAD, GUNTUR522007 REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSOCIATE PRESIDENT S. RAMESH BABU AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS OCC - JUNIOR LECTURER IN LIBRARY SCIENCE, PLACE OF WORK GOVERNMENT JUNIOR COLLEGE, SIRIPURAM - GUNTUR DISTRICT-AP

¶32

...PETITIONER(S)

¶33

AND

¶34

1.MS KRITIKA SUKLA, DIRECTOR OF INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION ANDHRA PRADESH BOARD OF SECONDARY AND INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶35

...CONTEMNOR

¶36

Counsel for the Petitioner(S);

¶37

1 .TAGORE YADAV YARAGORLA

¶38

Counsel for the Contemnor:

¶39

1.RAMALINGESWARA RAO KOCHARLA KOTA

¶40

The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER:

¶41

Heard Sri Tagore Yadav Yaragorla, learned Counsel for^{thePetitioners} and Sri Ramalingeswara Rao Kocharla Kota, learned Counsel for the Respondent.

¶42

Vide Order dated 12.03.2024, this Court had passed the following Order: “There shall be a further direction that, in the event of administrative exigency, if the Respondents are inclined to consider the promotions to the post of principals, they shall consider G.O.Ms.No.76, School Education (IE.A1) Department, dated 08.12.2021 (Ex.P.3) and without taking reference to Memo No.282614/IE-A1/2017-3, DATED 27.02.2024 (Ex.P.19).”

¶43

The present Contempt Case has been filed complaining^{oftheviolation} of the Order. It is the contention of the Petitioners that, despite the Interim Order, the Government has considered certain other categories for promotion without considering the Petitioners.

¶44

The Respondents have filed Counter-Affidavit along with the Proceedings dated 29.06.2025, bearing RC.No.Policy/2636333/2024. The Counter-Affidavit would indicate that as per the Rules in force, the Petitioners are entitled to reckon from the date of their inclusion in the Andhra Pradesh Intermediate Education Service Rules (APIES), i.e.,^{from11.03.2016onwards} for the purpose of their seniority.

¶45

Having considered these submissions, this Court is^{oftheviewthatthe} empanelment of the Petitioners will have to be decided only after hearing the Writ Petition on merits.

¶46