JUDGMENT : 1. Heard in detail. 2. While proceeding in the contempt case, to uphold the majesty of law which is supreme and above the all who and how so ever high, under Article 215 of the Constitution of India, by also taking for that purpose the aid of the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 particularly in admitting the contempt case and in drawing up the proceedings as per Sections 10 to 12 of the Act & Rule 18 of the Rules made in 1980 as per Section 23 of the Act, Issue Form-I notice from prima facie case of deliberate and wilful disobedience in flouting in a brazen manner the order of this Court passed in the W.P.No.8812 of 2018 dated 17.04.2018 when the same even very clearly reads as reproduced herein that: “Accordingly and in the result, the Writ Petition is allowed and the expulsion proceedings covered by Ex.P7-resolution and the consequential notification covered by Ex.P1(a & b) are set aside and it is made clear that there is automatic restoration and revival of the writ petitioners’ respective membership in the Telangana Legislative Assembly viz., of the 1st petitioner-Komati Reddy Venkat Reddy for No.92-Nalgonda Assembly Constituency, Telangana State and of the 2nd petitioner-S.A. Sampath Kumar for No.80-Alampur (SC) Assembly Constituency, Telangana State for their continuation as usual for their remaining tenure as duly elected MLAs for all purvoses with no order of expulsion, since set aside. It is made clear that if at all there is any criminal action to be taken or taken it no way bars for any such legal recourse to decide on its own merits. There is no order as to costs.” 3. For they did not obey and honour the order supra dated 17.04.2018 even date, including after the contempt case filed on 11.06.2018, from notice before admission ordered for the appearance of respondents 1 & 2 of the contempt petition viz., Sri V.Niranjan Rao, Secretary to Government Affairs, Law and Legislative Department, State of Telangana & Sri Dr. For they did not obey and honour the order supra dated 17.04.2018 even date, including after the contempt case filed on 11.06.2018, from notice before admission ordered for the appearance of respondents 1 & 2 of the contempt petition viz., Sri V.Niranjan Rao, Secretary to Government Affairs, Law and Legislative Department, State of Telangana & Sri Dr. V.Narasimhacharyulu, Secretary, the Legislature Secretariat, State of Telangana and by posted to 13.07.2018 and on that day, the Additional Advocate General for the 1st respondent and one Sri Sai Krishna, advocate, for the 2nd respondent having filed vakalats taken time and on 27.07.2018 filed counters and on that day came with a version of not liable for contempt and the petition is to be dismissed at the threshold and it is the Speaker of the State Legislature that has to take a decision even to draw the salaries and other benefits by de-notification of the expulsion notification dated 13.03.2018 including for the police officials to restore the gun man of them and even it is made clear there from that whoever responsible are bound to implement and once the order is very clear of the expulsion proceedings covered by Ex.P7-resolution and the consequential notification covered by EX.P1(a & b) are set aside and it is made clear that there is automatic restoration and revival of the writ petitioners’ respective membership in the Telangana Legislative Assembly, leave about de-notified or not including for Law Secretary to see that the order be implemented having knowledge of the consequences and there from taken time by the respondents to 03.08.2018 (all these facts in the course of hearing no doubt not reflected in the docket), but in adjourning at their request to see its implementation and again on 03.08.2018 taken time by the respondents in saying persuasions are going on for implementation of the order dated 17.04.2018 and thereby posted to 10.08.2018 and there from for further hearing to 13.08.2018 at their request under the caption ‘for consideration’ so to acknowledge as for hearing before drafting and issue of Form-I notice. On 13.08.2018 heard further and for consideration posted to 14.08.2018. 4. On 13.08.2018 heard further and for consideration posted to 14.08.2018. 4. Having perused the entire material including the order dated 17.04.2018 and copy of order passed in W.A.No.668 of 2018 dated 04.06.2018, the contempt petition and affidavit in this regard and also the counter affidavit of 1st respondent Sri V. Niranjan Rao-the 1st contemnor herein working as the Secretary to Government, Legal Affairs, Legislative Affairs and Justice, Law Department and also the counter affidavit of Sri Or. V Narsimha Charyulu, Secretary, the Legislature Secretariat, State of Telangana-the 2nd contemnor; there is a prima facie case in admitting the contempt case and in drawing up the proceedings and in directing thereby for their personal appearance on 17.09.2018, for the reason the respondents 1 & 2 shall not take shelter to disobey by non-implementation of the order of this Court referred supra dated 17.04.2018, from the mere non de-notification of the notification of expulsion dated 13.03.2018 in the official website, once the Court order is at the cost of repetition very clear of the expulsion proceedings covered by Ex.P7-resolution and the consequential notification covered by Ex.P1(a & b) are set aside and it is made clear that there is automatic restoration and revival of the writ petitioners’ respective membership in the Telangana Legislative Assembly …… for their continuation as usual for their remaining tenure as duly elected MLAs for all purposes with no order of expulsion. since set aside and for that matter the 1st respondent also should have advised those who are responsible to implement as observed in Paras 59 & 60 of the Division Bench expression of this Court in Md. Annanuallah Ghouri v. Government of AP [ 2013 (2) ALT 70 (DB)]. 5. It is made clear that the observations are for the limited purpose of issuing Form-I notice of personal appearance of respondents 1 & 2 supra and the counter contentions and the available defenses of the respondents 1 & 2 are left open to consider after their appearance as per the expression of the Apex Court in Purushottam Das Goel v. B.S.Dhillon- 1978 (2) SCC 370 . 6. 6. Coming to the expression of the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court placed reliance by the learned counsel for the petitioners reported in 2017 (7) SCC 1 in - In Re Hon’ble Sri Justice C.S. Karnan, suo motu contempt petition (C.No.1 of 2017) particularly Para 64 to 70 same is drawn attention and it no way requires any discussion. Coming to the two expressions placed reliance by the counsel for the respondents 1 & 2 supra the two Judge Bench of the Apex Court in Modern Food Industries India Limited v. Sachidananda Dass (1995 Supp (4) SCC 465) which quoted in Paras 3 & 4 the other judgment of the three Judge Bench of the Apex Court placed reliance of State of J & K v. Mohd. Yaqoob Khan ( 1992 (4) SCC 167 ); there appeals already filed with application for stay of operation of the impugned order of the learned Single Judge of the High Court even by the time the contempt case filed and in that context observed of proceeding with the contempt case by the learned Single Judge does not commend proper. Here in the case on hand the order of this Court as referred supra was dated 17.04.2018 and the contempt case was filed on 11.06.2018 and respondents did not file any appeal either by then or immediately thereafter even 30 days time lapsed long back and further 12 members of the Legislative Assembly filed appeal with leave to appeal that was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 04.06.2018 in W A.No.668 of 2018 and the respondents herein were served and participated as respondents 3 & 4 therein and having knowledge and having allowed the appeal time to lapse long back and even posted for appearance by 13.07.2018 and appeared through advocates and taken time and later filed counters where not even mentioned of any intention to file appeal either on that day or on 27.07.2018 or on 03.08.2018 but for in saying persuading to implement the order dated 17.04.2018 it is only filed the appeal after 03.08.2018 with delay condonation application even according to them and there admittedly sought for stay and not granted and the delay condonation application only coming for counter and hearing. Once such is the case, the above expressions and the principle laid down therein no way apply to the case on hand and further if at all there is any stay the Court no way choose to proceed; that too by this order it is not deciding anything on merits but for admitting and issuing by this order the Form-I notice directing personal appearance of respondents 1 & 2 by posting to 17.09.2018 to have a hearing on all available defenses of them in detail and so that any stay if at all to obtain they can meantime. 7. So far as to the necessity if any of impleadment of the Hon’ble Speaker of the Legislative Assembly by name and the Director General of Police, State of Telangana and the Superintendent of Police of Nalgonda District and Jogulamba Gadwal District by names respectively, separate order is pronounced.