Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 341 (AP)

K. Achamma v. Venkateswara University

2012-03-27

B.CHANDRA KUMAR

body2012
Judgment : The petitioner filed W.P.No.18949 of 2011 seeking regularization of services. This Court passed an elaborate order on 19.7.2011 in the said writ petition directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the rules and regulations of it, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order and to communicate the same to the petitioner. Now, the respondents have communicated a memo No.EI(3)/2011 dated 29.10.2011 to the petitioner, stating that the request of the petitioner for change of her date of regularization of service from the date of regularization of service to her juniors is not complied with. The learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent submits that the services of the petitioner were regularized with effect from 1.6.2005 as per the permission of the Government. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in fact, the first respondent has not obtained any such permission from the Government while regularizing her services w.e.f 1.6.2005. Be that as it may. Now, it is clear that this Court passed orders on 19.7.2011 in W.P.No.18949/2011. The first respondent after receiving the orders of this Court ought to have taken steps to consider the case of the petitioner once again, in terms of the orders of this Court. At this stage, this Court has no option except to go through the dictionary meaning of the word ‘consider’ by referring to two or three premier dictionaries. As per the Chambers Dictionary 10th Edition, the word ‘consider’ means “look at attentively or carefully; to think or deliberate on; to take into account; to attend to, to regard as, to think, hold the opinion, to reward, think seriously or carefully, to deliberate.” As per the OxfordDictionary Thesaurus and Wordpower Guide, Indian Edition 2007, the word ‘consider’ means “think carefully about; take into account when making judgment; contemplate; reflect on; examine; review; mull over; ponder; deliberate on.” As per Collins English Dictionary, the word ‘consider’ means ‘to think carefully about (a problem or decision); to bear in mind; to have regard for or care about; to discuss (something) in order to make a decision; to look at.” The Apex Court in case between DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY AND ANOTHER Vs. T.R. CHALLAPPAN (1976) 3 SCC 190 , observed that to consider means; there should be active application of the mind and further observed that the term consider postulates consideration of all the aspects. In cases between THE BARIUM CHEMICALS LTD AND ANOTHER Vs. Sh. A.J. RANA AND OTHERS AIR 1972 SC 591 and AJIT SINGH AND OTHERS (II) Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS (1999) 7 SCC 209 , the Apex Court observed that “It is therefore manifest that careful thinking or due application of the mind regarding the necessity to obtain and examine the documents in question is sine qua non for the making of the order.” Therefore, the dictionary meaning of the word ‘consider’ means to consider basing on the material available on record. To consider means to consider sincerely and honestly, which means to make sincere effort to pass an order in the letter and spirit of the directions of this Court. To consider means to make all efforts to fulfil the object of the order of the Court. To consider does not mean to search for a lame excuse and reject the claim. It does not mean to just pass an order and dismiss the claim of the petitioner on flimsy grounds. Therefore, the respondents shall not invent or search some fresh reason or other technical ground and reject the claim of the petitioner when there is a specific direction by this Court to consider the case of the petitioner. The Authorities cannot show the same reason or ground which they had already taken in the earlier proceedings. This amounts to showing disrespect to the orders of the court. The authorities cannot flout the orders of the Court on technical grounds. If at all they require permission of the Government, they must address the Government enclosing the copy of the order of the court or orders of the quasi judicial authorities and the authorities at the government level also should and must take into consideration the directions and observations of the court and purport of those orders. No authority can disturb the findings or observations of any court. The findings, directions or observations of a court can only be disturbed, varied, modified or set aside by the court, superior to the court which made those findings or directions. Except the superior court, no authority can take a contra view, taken by a court. No authority can disturb the findings or observations of any court. The findings, directions or observations of a court can only be disturbed, varied, modified or set aside by the court, superior to the court which made those findings or directions. Except the superior court, no authority can take a contra view, taken by a court. Rejection of the claim on a ground which they had already taken in the earlier proceedings and which has been already considered and rejected by the Court amounts to nothing but Contempt of Court and disobeying the orders of the Court. In the light of the same, it is clear that the 1st respondent ought to have addressed a letter to the Government if at all he thought permission of the Government was necessary. Admittedly, the first respondent has not taken any such steps. The impugned memo does not show that the first respondent has addressed any letter to the 2nd respondent. Thus, it is clear that the 1st respondent has not complied with the orders of this Court. Moreover, no reasons have been assigned for not complying with the orders of this Court. Any order, any decision should be supported by valid reasons. In view of the same, the first respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders in terms of the directions given by this Court in W.P.No.18949 of 2011 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that failing to comply with the directions of this Court may amount to Contempt of Court and probably the first respondent has to face all the consequences if the orders of this court are not complied with. The writ petition is disposed of subject to the observations above. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions if any stand closed.