Dismissed

Banoth Bhadru Naik v. Dr.Budha Prakash Jyothi

Telangana HC6 Sept 2023CC/1472/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a contempt case against two respondents for alleged mechanical compliance with a High Court order to consider representation on his suspension. The High Court held that the respondents exercised judicial discretion based on serious allegations against the petitioner, finding no willful disobedience and dismissed the contempt case.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Case closed with no order as to costs. Pending interlocutory applications also closed.

Banoth Bhadru Naik Vs Dr.Budha Prakash Jyothi — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32ss ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶6

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1472OF 2023

¶7

Contempt Case filed Under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for his wilfully violating the Orders of the High Court dated 11.4.2023 passed in W.P. No.2040 of 2023.

¶8

Between

¶9

Banoth Bhadru Naik, S/o. Dasu Naik(Late), Aged 59 years, Occ. DTO lncharge, R/o.^'l 1-9-66, Road No.2, Laxminagar Colony, Kothapet, Hyderabad - 35

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 Dr.Budha Prakash Jyothi, Transport Commissioner, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Transport Bhavan, Khairatabad, Hyderabad Telangana State.

¶13

2 Sri Srinivasa Raju, lAS, Principal Secretary, Transport, Roads and Buildings Dept, T.S. Secreta riat, (Errumanzil) Hyderabad

¶14

...RESPONDENTS/CONTEMNORS

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRl. P V RAMANA

¶16

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES lll

¶17

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶18

il\

¶19

¶20

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶21

CONTEMPT CASE No.1472 of2o23

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

This Contempt Case is liled under Sections 1O to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act by the petitioner to punish the respondents-contemnors for willfully violating and disobeying the Orders dated I1.O4.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.2040 of 2023.

¶24

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-lII on behalf of respondents and perused the record.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that without referring to the Judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court of India in AJag Kumar Choutdhary o. Irn;lon of Indiar the second respondent have issued proceedings in R.No.3188/Vl/2022 dated 29.05.2023 in mechanical manner. Hence, he sought for taking action against the respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act, for willfully violating and disobeying

¶26

I Civit Appeal No.lg12 of2Ol5 (Arising out ofSLP No.3l76l of20ll) decided on 16.02.2015

¶27

¶28

the Orders dated 11.O4.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.2O40 of 2023.

¶29

This Court while disposing the said Writ Petition this Court directed the respondent No.2 therein to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 31.12.2022 with:in a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the Order and respondents are directed pass appropriate Orders strictly in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks thereon

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had submitted representations dated 3 1 . L2.2O22 and 09.05.2O23 while enclosing the Orders dated 1L.O4.2O23 passed by this Court in W.P.No.204O of 2023 and that the respondents issued proceedings 1n R.No.3 188/Vl / 2022 dated 29.O5.2O23 in mechanical manner which reads as under:

¶31

'In tle reference 2nd cited, Si Banoth Bhadru Naik, MVI, O/O DTO Vikarobad utas kept under suspension as he has been detained in custodg for^{a periodexceeding48 hours w.e.f. 23-07-2022.} In the reference 3rd cited representation of indiuidual along uith orders of Hon'ble High Court in W.P No. 2O4O/2O23 uere filed the action should be taken on representation uithin prescibed time.

¶32

In uieut of the orders of Hon'ble High Coutt, after examination of the representation of Sri Banoth Bhodru NaiN MVI(U/ s) and material auailable on record, as per G.O Ms. No. 86, G.A(Ser.D) Department,

¶33

¶34

dt: 08.O3.1994 and circumstances preuoiled in this case & the serious ollegotions against him that the indiuidual uas inuolued in a murder case of a person and Le tuas shoutn as A7 in a case registered in Rural Police Station of Suryapet Distict, it is considered not desirable to reuoke his suspension In larger public interest and in the interest of administratiue grounds and it is decided to continue Sri B. Bhadru Naik, MVI, O/O DTO Vkarabod under suspension.

¶35

Therefore, Si Banoth Bhadnt Naik, MVI, 0/O DTO Vikarabad is continued under suspension until furtLrcr^{orders, to be reuieuedas per G.O Ms. No. 86,} G.A(Ser. D) Departmetn, dt: O8. O3. 1 994.

¶36

Other conditions laid doun in the reference 2nd cited uould be continued."

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondents ought to have considered the representations of the petitioner in true later and spirit of the order but the 1n respondents have passed the impugned proceedings mechanical manner and continued the petitioner under suspension. Therefore, the respondents aLe liable for punishment for willfully violating and disobeying the Orders dated 11.04.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.2O4O of 2023

¶38

07 . Learned Government Pleader for Services-Ill would submit that the Order of this Court has been strictly complied with and it is on the order of this Court the representations made by the petitioner had been considered in detail and it is found not desirable to revoke the petitioner's suspension in larger public

¶39

¶40

interest and in the interest of administrative grounds and it is decided to continue the petitioner under suspension, as serious AS allegations are levelled against the petitioner who arrayed accused No.l in a murder case punishable for the offence under Section 3O2 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, no willful disobedience can be attributed to the respondents in passing the impugned proceedings and sought for closure of contempt case.

¶41

On perusal of the impugned proceedings issued by the respondents in compliance of order of this Court, this Court is of the opinion that there is no willful or deliberate disobedience on the part of the respondents and this Contempt Case is liable to be closed.

¶42

Accordingly, this Contempt Case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶43

As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.

¶44

SD/. I NAGALAKSHMI' ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR.

//TRUE COPY//

f1/,-

SECTION OFFICER

To, 1. One CC to^{SRl. P V RAMANAAdvocate[OPUC]} i. i;; cc, to op^{FOR SERVTCES ilt,Highcourt for the stateof Telangana} lourl

¶49

Two CD^CoPies ADK \ V

HIGH COURT

DATED:061O912023

ORDER

e sTArs
t,i
q
J
1 fl uEc 2[?l a
o
* '?.
DE:.r!rr'i'

¶54

CC.No.1472 oI 2023

¶55

CLOSING THE CC WITHOUT COSTS

¶56

;f'>

Banoth Bhadru Naik v. Dr.Budha Prakash Jyothi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Banoth Bhadru Naik v. Dr.Budha Prakash Jyothi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ambati Venkateshwar Reddy, Vs the State of A.P. Rep., by Its Pp

Gundelly Mallesh Vs the State of A.P

Madini Philips , Philip Vs the State of A.P.

P.Prabhaker Rao, Medak Dt., Vs State of Telangana, Rep Pp.

A.Chandrasekhar , Shekar, Ramnagar, Hyderabad Vs the State of A.P. Rep. by Sub Inspector of Police, Hyd and Anr.

Chintala Arjun Kumar , Arjun, Warangal Vs State of a.P., Rep. by Pp., High Court