Contempt petition alleging willful negligence in complying with prior court orders was dismissed after counsel submitted compliance for some petitioners; liberty granted to others.
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.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
CONTEMPT CASE No. 2165 of 2013
Date :20.4.2018
Between:
Sree Srinivasa Aided Upper Primary School Nehrunagar, Cumbum, Prakasam district Rep by its Head Master A Venkateswarlu and others
Petitioners
And
Sri Rajeshwar Tiwari IAS Govt of A P Rep by its Principal Secretary Education (COSE) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others
Respondents
The Court made the following:
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
CONTEMPT CASE No. 2165 of 2013
ORAL ORDER:
This Contempt Case is filed alleging willful negligence in complying with the orders of this Court in W.P No. 28739 of 2013 dated 22.10.2013. When the matter is taken up, learned counsel for petitioner fairly submitted that insofar as second petitioner is concerned, orders of this Court are complied with and in view of the averments made in paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit deposed by Mr.B.Vijaya Bhaskar, Deputy Director (Training)/third respondent, liberty may be granted to petitioners 1 and 3 to avail appropriate remedies available to them in law.
Recording the statement of learned counsel for petitioners, contemnors are discharged and contempt case is accordingly closed. No costs. Having regard to the same, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, are closed.
__________________ P NAVEEN RAO,J
DATE:20-04-2018 TVK
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
CONTEMPT CASE No. 2165 of 2013
Date :20.4.2018
Sree Srinivasa Aided Upper Primary School Nehrunagar
A Venkateswarlu
Sri Rajeshwar Tiwari
Government of A P
P. Naveen Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
