The Court accepted the respondent's unconditional apology for a bona fide lapse in placing the petitioner's application on the agenda during the specified meetings and closed the contempt case filed for willful disobedience of a prior order.
Contempt case is closed upon acceptance of unconditional apology.
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 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
CONTEMPT CASE No.274 of 2014
Dated: 04.07.2014
Between: Haragopal Educational Society (Regd.No.707/1994), Visakhapatnam, Rep. by its Secretary & Correspondent Tulugu Sankara Rao Naidu .. Petitioner and Smt. Dr. P. Revathi Reddy .. Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. S.V. Muni Reddy Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. K. Ramakanth Reddy
.. Respondent
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This contempt case is filed alleging willful disobedience of order dated 06.02.2014 in C.C.No.2254 of 2013.
Both the parties have filed copious pleadings on record.
This Court has summoned the respondent and she has appeared before the Court. The main defence of the respondent is that the Council has not received the petitioner’s purported application dated 10.02.2014 till 17.02.2014, by which time agenda for 262nd meeting of S.R.C. was finalized and the schedule of meeting was commenced.
Even assuming that the petitioner did not make its application till 17.02.2014, this Court feels that the respondent ought to have included the petitioner’s application in the additional agenda at least during the meetings on 18.02.2014 or 19.02.2014. The respondent has tendered her unconditional apology for not doing so. She stated that she has recently taken over as Regional Director and that due to bona fide lapse, the item could not be placed as an additional item of agenda.
In the counter-affidavit dated 12.03.2014, the respondent has stated that as the petitioner’s application could not be considered for the year 2014-2015, as it was impossible to complete the process in 48 hours, the Committee has taken a decision to treat the said application as “pipeline” case and process the same for 2015-2016.
Mr. K. Ramakanth Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent, has assured on behalf of the respondent that the application already made by the petitioner and received by the Council on 17.02.2014 will be treated as the application made for the academic year 2015-2016 and the same will be processed without there being any need for the petitioner to file a fresh application. This assurance is placed on
record.
While accepting the unconditional apology tendered by the respondent, the contempt case is closed.
________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 4th July, 2014 IBL
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent's unconditional apology for bona fide lap in handling the petitioner's application warrants closing the contempt case.
Haragopal Educational Society
Smt. Dr. P. Revathi Reddy
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
