Telangana High Court
CC/1541/2012 of M.Bara Imam, Vs Sri.J.S.V.Prasad, on 28 December 2012
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWELVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CONTEMPT CASE No.1541 of 2012 BETWEEN: M. Bara Imam. ... PETITIONER AND Sri J. S.V. Prasad, Director/Commissioner of Intermediate
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWELVE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
CONTEMPT CASE No.1541 of 2012
BETWEEN:
M. Bara Imam.
AND
... PETITIONER
Sri J. S.V. Prasad, Director/Commissioner of Intermediate Education,Nampally, Hyderabad and two others.
...RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. V.V. NARASIMHA RAO
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION GP FOR FINANCE & PLANNING
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learnedGovernment Pleaders appearing for the respondents.
2. The operative direction in WP.No.11320 of 2001 dated 27.01.2012 is as follows:
“Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the thirdrespondent to forthwith act upon the recommendations of the Director, Intermediate Education, Hyderabad contained inletter dated 3.7.2004 addressed to Principal Secretary toGovernment, Higher Education (IE-II) Department,Hyderabad and issue necessary orders in accordance withlaw for fixation of petitioner’s pay including release ofincrements and all consequential benefits. Let this action betaken by the third respondent within two months from the dateof receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.”
3. Alleging disobedience of the said direction, the present contempt caseis filed.
4. In response to the notice before admission ordered by this Court,respondent No.3 has filed a counter affidavit specifically stating in para 7 asfollows:
“7. It is further submitted that the relevant file vide C.No.3975/IE.II-1/2002 of Higher Education (IE) Department was received in FinanceDepartment on 29-10-2012. After examining the matter, necessaryaction was taken and accordingly orders were issued in Govt.Memo.No.29312/184/PC.I/A1/2012, dated 31-10-2012, so as toenable the competent authorities to fix the pay of the petitioner in theRevised Pay Scales, 1993 and onwards. There was no delay on thepart of this 3[rd] respondent herein.”
5. It is evident from the above that appropriate orders have now beenpassed to enable the competent authority to fix the pay of the petitioner in therevised pay scales of 1993 onwards. In view of that, the direction of thisCourt stands complied with except to the extent of implementing the saidrevised pay scales by giving payment to the petitioner accordingly.
6. Learned Government Pleader for the first respondent submits andseeks time till 31.01.2013 to make payment accordingly.
Recording the same, the contempt case is dismissed.
The miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be noorder as to costs.
December 28, 2012DSK
_____________________VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J