Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 1177 (AP)

I. Thirupal Naik v. K. Vijayanand

2024-08-23

VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

body2024
ORDER : 1. This Contempt Case has been filed complaining willful disobedience in implementing the interim order dated 17.03.2023 passed by this Court in I.A. No. 1 of 2022 in W.P. No. 19361 of 2022. 2. The Hon’ble High Court was pleased to pass the interim order in I.A. No. 1 of 2022 in W.P. No. 19361 of 2022 on 17.03.2023 as follows: “.......Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for APTRANSCO appearing for the 2nd Respondent. Even after granting sufficient time for the respondents to file counter they failed to file the counter. Hence this court is inclined to pass an interim order. Therefore having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners, there shall be an interim direction to the respondents to engage the petitioners as shift operators or in any posts or vacant posts in the respondent organization at Anantapur District in the existing vacancies, pending writ Petition......” 3. It is submitted that immediately after receipt of the copy of the interim order. The petitioners herein made a representation to the Respondents on 28.03.2023 to consider them as shift operators or any vacant post in the organization under Jurisdiction of District authorities in existing vacancies and to comply with the orders of the Hon’ble High Court granted in I.A. No. 1 of 2022 in W.P. No. 19361 of 2022, dated 17.03.2023. But, the Respondents are miserably failed to obey the orders of this Hon’ble High Court and wilfully, intentionally, disobeyed and deliberately violated the orders of this Hon’ble High Court, even after receipt of the Order of this Hon’ble High Court and failed to comply with the directions, thereby committed the Contempt. The attitude of the Respondents are in evasive and not implementing the same for the reasons best known to them. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that even after receipt of copy of the order of this Court, the Respondents neither appointed the petitioners against existing vacancies nor passed any speaking order by considering representation of the petitioners dated 28.03.2003. For the reasons known to the Respondents, had conveniently ignored the representation as well as order of this Court. Therefore, the Respondents herein are liable for punishment under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 5. For the reasons known to the Respondents, had conveniently ignored the representation as well as order of this Court. Therefore, the Respondents herein are liable for punishment under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 5. Sri Anup Koushik Karavadi, learned counsel for Respondent No. 4 filed a counter affidavit wherein it is stated that the Respondent No. 4 had filed an application vide I.A. No. 2 of 2023 in W.P. No. 19361 of 2022 seeking vacation of the interim order passed by this Hon’ble Court on 17.07.2023. It is further stated that the Respondents chose to contest the W.P. No. 19361 of 2022 on merits as it is believed that the Writ Petitioners in the said writ petition has no probable chances to succeed in the said writ petition. 6. It is argued that once vacate application is filed, contempt proceedings should not be insisted till disposal of vacate application, for which the learned counsel for Respondent No. 4 replied upon the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Jammu and Kashmir vs. Mohd. Yaqoob and Others, (1992) 4 SCC 167 clearly held that whenever any stay vacation application has been filed for vacation of interim order, the proceedings of contempt should be deferred till disposal of such application. It is submitted that applying the said ratio to the present facts of the case, the captioned contempt may be closed against Respondent No. 4 for the sole reason of pendency of the Vacate Stay Application in the main writ petition. It is submitted that any action in the captioned contempt petition during the subsistence of the above mentioned Vacate Stay petition could cause irreparable damage to the Respondents as there is great probability of success for the Respondents in the Main Writ Petition. 7. It is further stated that the Interim Order granted in favour of the Petitioner in I.A. No. 1 of 2022 in the Main Writ Petition W.P. No. 19361 of 2022 out of the control of the Respondents to implement the same and therefore the captioned Contempt Petition is liable to be dismissed in liminie. 8. It is further stated that even by referring to the contents of the material that is relied upon by the Petitioners, it could be clarified beyond doubt that no vacancies are existing in which the petitioners could be appointed. 8. It is further stated that even by referring to the contents of the material that is relied upon by the Petitioners, it could be clarified beyond doubt that no vacancies are existing in which the petitioners could be appointed. It is further stated that due to non availability of the vacancies only, the implementation of the Interim Orders is become impossible on part of Respondent No. 4. And consequentially, it is clear that the Contempt is not maintainable since the petitioner mislead the Court by stating that there are vacancies and invited the impugned interim order. Hence it is liable to be dismissed. 9. Sri Dheera Kanishka, learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 filed Reply-Affidavits wherein it is stated that the orders dated 17.03.2022 was neither inform Respondent No. 6 nor served any notice in the writ proceedings, to enable the Respondent No. 6 to contest the matter effectively. As such, the Respondent No. 6 completely handicapped either to contest the matter or even to get a fair knowledge about the existing writ-proceedings. But, to the utter shock and dismay, the Respondent No. 6 was made as party Respondent before this Hon’ble Court in this Contempt Proceedings. 10. It is further stated that, Respondent No. 6 did not have any previous acquaintance with the writ petitioners’ at any point of time. Neither, they have worked with the petitioner, at any point of time nor there is no cause of action between the petitioner and this Respondent. It is to place on record that Respondent No. 6 is a ‘Grade-A’ private contractor and being contractor he had undertook the Manning Works for the Hindupur-Division with respect to 220KV Sub-Stations from A.P. TRANSCO and also undertook Gooty-Division (APSPDCL) manning works. 11. It is further stated that Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 hereby tendering their unconditional apology, if at all this Hon’ble Court comes to a conclusion that they have deliberately violated the interim orders dated 17.03.2022, even after the above explanation rendered. It is to place on record that, being the private-contractors and effectively worked for various departments, their role is very limited in having control over the said affairs of the departments. It is to place on record that, being the private-contractors and effectively worked for various departments, their role is very limited in having control over the said affairs of the departments. Further, it is stated that they have highest regards to the Hon’ble High Court and its Judiciary/Legal Proceedings and they have no intentions at any point of time, to disrespect or disregard the orders of this Hon’ble Court. As such, lack of knowledge about the said legal proceedings has made handicapped to effectively contest the same. Hence, they prayed before this Hon’ble Court that to exonerate them from the above captioned contempt proceedings in the interests of justice. Unless this Hon’ble Court exonerates Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 from the contempt case, they will be put to irreparable loss and serious hardship. 12. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Respondents and perused the material placed on record along with writ petition as well as counter affidavits. 13. This Court passed an interim order dated 17.03.2023 directing the Respondents to engage the petitioners as shift operators or in any posts or vacant posts in the respondent organization at Anantapur District in the existing vacancies. Whereas the Respondents categorically denied that the contention of the petitioners regarding the existence of vacancies and duly stated in their counter affidavits that there are no sanctioned vacant posts at Respondent Corporation in Anantapur District. 14. The evidence filed by the petitioners pending under RTI Act, by which the petitioners made believe this Court that there are existing vacancies are not the real vacancies and that are only in respect of contract labour to be engaged through contractors at various substations. Therefore, the Respondents clarified this Court beyond doubt that they are no existing vacancies, at the Respondent Corporation i.e. Respondent No. 2 to redress the claim of the petitioners. Therefore, in the absence of vacancies as alleged by the petitioners with the Respondent Corporation, the implementation of interim orders is impossible and out of control of the Respondents. 15. It is further observed that there was no foolproof of evidence filed by the petitioners along with a contempt petition to prove that there are existing vacancies available with the Respondent organization other than the workforce of contract labour through contractors for operation of substations. 16. 15. It is further observed that there was no foolproof of evidence filed by the petitioners along with a contempt petition to prove that there are existing vacancies available with the Respondent organization other than the workforce of contract labour through contractors for operation of substations. 16. The counter affidavits filed by the Respondents further explained that the shift operator posts should be filled up by the third party contractor, who is a private agency due to the old aged policy evolved by the Respondents since decades. Therefore, it is clearly shows that neither regular posts nor sanctioned posts/strength were sanctioned in respect of O&M manpower at sub-stations through existing contract labour through a contractor against contract posts. 17. It is further observed that, all the Respondents filed their respective answers and the Respondents tendered their unconditional apology through their sworn affidavits. 18. In view of the tendering of unconditional apology by the Respondents and in fact in the absence of any existing vacancies for implementation of orders of this Court, this Court is of the considered view that there is no wilful and intentional violation on the part of the Respondents as alleged by the petitioners in the Contempt Case. 19. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 20. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed.