ORDER : R. SUBHASH REDDY, J. 1. These applications are filed under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 alleging that the respondents have violated the directions issued by this Court in the order dated 03.10.2016 passed in the captioned Special Civil Applications. Special Civil Application No. 16810 of 2016 was filed with the prayers, which read as under; “(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow this writ petition. (B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, commanding or directing the respondent authorities to consider the request of the petitioner to give benefit of continuity in service as per the award/judgment dated 23.12.2014 passed by the Labour Court in Reference No. 41 of 2005 and prepare the Service Book of the present petitioners and treat them as permanent employees as per the findings and direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment in 2013 (2) GLH 692 and grant benefits like (hra, Pay increments, etc.) and all other benefits granted in the G.R Dated 17.10.1988 from the date of their entitlement. (C) Your Lordships be further pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent authorities to examine the case of the petitioners within stipulated period and consider the case of the petitioner about continuity in service as per the award/judgment dated 23.12.2014 passed by the Labour Court in Reference No. 41 of 2005 and put his services as permanent status and prepare the Service Book of the petitioner and give benefits as per G.R Dated 17.10.1988 immediately grant all benefits of G.R Dated 17.10.1988, including Sunday leave, National festival holiday leave, House Rent allowances and total three pay increments and minimum wages, etc. (D) Your Lordship may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant all benefits as per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Gujarat v. PWD Employees' Union reported in [2013 (8) SCALE 597: 2013 (2) GLH 692]. (E) Pending admission and final hearing/disposal of this application, Your Lordships may be pleased to pass any other and/or further order, and the respondents authorities be directed not to terminate the services of the petitioners, in the interest of justice. (F) Your Lordships be pleased to pass any other and/or further order, as may be deemed fit in the interest of justice.” 2. (F) Your Lordships be pleased to pass any other and/or further order, as may be deemed fit in the interest of justice.” 2. The learned single Judge, by order dated 03.10.2016, disposed of the petitions by directing the competent authority to examine and consider the case of the original petitioners for the grant of benefits under the Government Resolutions dated 17.10.1988 and 15.09.2014 keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case of the petitioners and the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of P.W.D Employees' Union v. State of Gujarat reported in (2013) 12 SCC 417 . 3. When this matter came up for hearing on an earlier date, it was adjourned at the instance of learned AGP for the purpose of taking instructions. Today, learned AGP submitted that in compliance of the directions issued by the learned single Judge, the case of the applicants was examined and by reasoned order dated 29.03.2017, their applications were rejected. 4. We have also perused the copy of the order dated 29.03.2017 placed before us, which indicate that the claim of the applicants were examined and rejected by recording reasons. In that view of the matter, it cannot be said that the respondents have committed willful and deliberate violation of the directions of this Court attracting the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 5. Though, it is argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the respondents have not taken into consideration the issue of grant of benefit of continuity of service to the applicants, which has been extended by the award of the Labour Court but, in our view, the same is not a mater, which could be gone into in these applications. The correctness or otherwise of the order dated 29.03.2017 cannot be gone into in these applications filed under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, these applications stand disposed of. However, we grant liberty to the applicants to challenge the order dated 29.03.2017 in appropriate proceedings.