Dismissed

K.Jai Barath v. Sri T.V. Somanathan, IAS

Telangana HC24 Jul 2023CC/985/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This contempt case filed for willful disobedience of a High Court order directing compassionate appointment was disposed of. The court opined that despite the new speaking order, the matter required further legal examination and thus unsuitable for this forum.

What did the court decide?

The contempt case is closed with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the speaking order through appropriate legal remedies.

K.Jai Barath Vs Sri T.V. Somanathan, IAS — Contempt of Court | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

132521

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY, THE TWENry FOURTH^{DAY OF JULY} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI^NANDA

¶6

CONTEMPT CASE No: 985 OF²⁰²³

¶7

Contempt Case filed Under Section^{10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish} the respondents herein for willful disobedience^{of the Orders of the HighCourt made} in W.P.No.23372 of 2013 dated 26-09-2022.

¶8

Between:

¶9

K.Jai Barath, S/o Late K.Jaipal^{Swamy, Hindu, Aged about 29 Years, Occ.} Un-Employee, H.No.23-4-65lA, Sultan^{Shahi, Hyderabad.}

¶10

K.Swaroopa, Wo Late K.Jaipal^{Swamy, Aged about 50 Years,Occ.} Housewife, Hindu, H.No.23-4-65lA, Sultan^{Shahi, Hyderabad.}

¶11

...Petitioners

¶12

AND

¶13

Sri T.V. Somanathan, lAS, Finance^{Secretary, Union of lndia. Ministry of} Finance, North Block. New Delhi.

¶14

Sri V.N.R. Nayudu, Chief General^{Manager, lndiaGovernment Mint, IDA} Phase-ll, Cherlapally, Ranga Reddy^{District. Hyderabad.}

¶15

...Respondents

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI^{B. KRISHNA}

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents:^{SRI G. PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUWSOLICIT9R} GENERAL OF INDIA

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE^{SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶20

CONTE MPT CASE No.985^OF2023

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

Heard learned^{counse! for the petitionersand} Mr.G.Praveen^{Kumar, learned StandingCounselappearing} on behalf of^{the resPondents.}

¶23

The contempt case^{has been filed for wilful violation and} deliberate disobeying^{of the orders passed by this Court in} W.P.No.23372 of^{20t3 dated 26.09.2Q22.}

¶24

This Court^{vide order dated 26.09.2O22 disposedof} the Writ Petition^{No.23372ol 2013, and the relevant}

¶25

operative^{portionof the order reads as under:}

¶26

"For all the circumstances and^{reasons explained} above this Court opines that the^{judgmentsrelied} upon by the counsel^for the^{respondentshaveno} application to the facts of the^{present caseand} taking into consideration the^{observationsof the} Division Bench of A.P. High Courtⁱⁿ W.A.No.206/202I, dt. 01.10.2021^{in Andhra Bank} Now Union Bank of India & others^{v. B.Rajasekhar} and subsequently confirmed by the Apex Court^vide its order dated 14.02.2022 and the observations of the Apex Court dated 20.05.2022 in Judgement reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 684 in Malaya

¶27

¶28

Nanda Sethy v. State of^{Orissa & Others referred to} and extracted above^{the writ petition is allowed and} the proceedings No.1-48A/Admn/ 20t0, Compassionate/1360, dated^{22/23.02'2010issued} by the 3'd Respondent and^{the proceedings} No.1-48A/Admnl20l0lL7L4, dated^30.10.2014 issued by the 2nd Respondent^{are set aside as} contrary to the^{proceedingsNo'19(O)/2Ot2lD(Lab),} dt.08.08.2012 of the 1't^{Respondentand the} Respondents are directed to^{reconsiderthe case of} the ltt Petitioner for appointment^{on compassionate} grounds in any suitable^post within 4 weeks^from today duly taking into^{considerationthe} observations of the Apex^{Courtextracted above and} also the fact that under similar^{circumstances7} cases had been considered^{by the Respondents} herein and compassionate^{appointmentsprovided} under SPMCIL Compassionate^{Appointment Scheme} 2012 vide F.No.14BAlPer/2020-21/LOl6, dt. 09.09.2020^{withoutholdingthe said applications} filed by the said 7 applicants^{as belated requests for} compassionate appointment.^{However, thereshall} be no order as to costs."

¶29

The Division Bench of this Court^{passed order dated} 23.11-.2022 in Writ Appeal No.758 ot^{2022, in particular,} the operative^portion of the Judgment^{observingas under:}

¶30

"Having considered the rival^{submissionsmadeby} the learned counsel on either^{side, this Court is of}

¶31

¶32

the view that the learned Single Judge^{has directed} the appellants to re-consider the case of the^1tt respondent and learned Single ludge^{was justified} in disposing of the writ^petition in favour of the^1't respondent. Hence, this Court is not^{inclined to} interfere with the order^passed by the^learned Single Judge.

¶33

Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs. "

¶34

The counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent, in particular, para 19, reads as under:

¶35

"19. It is respectfully submitted that, the office of the 2nd Respondent and Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance has highest regards to the orders passed by the Hon'ble Court and never disobeyed orders dated 26.09.2022 of the Hon'ble High Court in W.P.No.23372 of 2013. It is to submit that after issuance of the order in above writ^petition, the respondents have approached the Division bench of this Hon'ble High Court by filing a W.A.No.758 of 2022 and this Hon'ble Court has dismissed the said appeal on 26.L1.2022 by confirming the order of this Hon'ble Court to re-consider the case of Respondent No.1 for Compassionate Appointment. The orders of the Hon'ble Court have been received by the office of the 2nd Respondent on 05.01.2023 and the case has been further taken up with Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi being the

¶36

¶37

Competent Authority^{in this Matter.After considering} the issue diligently,^{Departmentof Economic Affairs,} Ministry of Finance^{vide its Letter No.5/8} 12022-SPMC dated 06.04.2023, has^{conveyed its approval for} issuance of speaking order^{rejecting the case of} petitioners after considering the orders of^this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.23372 of^2O13.After receipt of the said communication^{on t8.04-2023,} the 2nd respondent has^{issued the Speaking order} approved by the^{Departmentof Economic Affairs,} Ministry of Finance^{Vide order dated 20'04.2023."}

¶38

The counter affldavit^{filed by the 2nd respondent also} brings on record the^{Speaking Orderdated 20.04.2023vide} O rd e r F. N o.¹ 20 lB /⁹ I^{2022-IG M H - Leg a l/W.P .23372} /^r33.

¶39

In view of the fact that^{in pursuanceof the ordersof} this Court dated 26.O9.2022^{passedin w.P.No-23372 ot} 2O13, the case of the^{petitioners had been reconsidered} and orders^passed on^{2O.o4.2O23by the 2nd respondent,} the Contempt Case is^{closed, giving liberty tothe} petitioners to challenge the Speaking Order^dated 2O.O4.2O23^passed by the^{2nd respondentherein. ftis} pleaded by the counse! for^petitioners that the^order passed in pursuance to the directions of this^Courtdated 26.09.2022 in W.P.No.23372 ot^{2013 is identicalto the}

¶40

¶41

earlier proceedings dated 3O.10.2O14 issued by the^2nd respondent rejecting the case of the^{petitioners for} appointment on compassionate grounds which had^been in fact challenged in W.P.No.23372 of 2O13 and had even been set aside by this Court vide its orders dated 26.09.2022 passed in W.P.No.23372 of 2013 and the same identical set of reasons as reflected in the order dated 3O.1O.2O14 are reiterated in the^present Speaking Order dated 2O.O4.2023 and the case of the^petationers is being mechanically rejected, this Court opines that the same cannot be looked into or examined in the^present Contempt Case, exercising contempt^{jurisdiction.} It is open for the petitioners to avail the remedies as available to the petitioners under !aw, However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶42

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶43

Sd/- M. RAMANA KRISHNA DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// (tu

¶44

To,

¶45

SECTION OFFICER

¶46

1 One CC to SRI B KR|SHNA, Advocate tOpUCl

¶47

2 9.ng 9C^{to SRt G. PRAVEEN KUIUAR,} Deputy Soticitor General of lndia. High Courr for the State of Tetangana jt f_fy'0"7"U"'di'OuT)-^'

¶48

3 Two CD Copies

kam 7 <')

t I

HIGH COURT

DATED:2410712023

ORDER

CC.No.985 o12023

z--:-::---
-. \ l\t :;r4) /. <br>1-..
ii
t(-) 21 AUE 2M
ij
'..-t -. .t
.'. r, . .,, 'l i.
' 'L;'

¶56

THE CONTEMPT CASE IS CLOSED

¶57

(9?

K.Jai Barath v. Sri T.V. Somanathan, IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Jai Barath v. Sri T.V. Somanathan, IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Velmajala Seshagiri Rao Vs State of Telangana

T. Thirupathaiah Vs The State of Telangana

S.P.Jaggulal alias Babulal, Vs State of Telangana

Sri GajulaBhakar Vs The State of Telangana

Jadi Raju Vs Prl.Secy., Revenue Dept., Hyd., and 3 Others

Renuka Yellamma Temple, Vs The State of Telangana