P.Ramchandraiah v. Shri Aravind Kumar, Ias
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
FRIDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO i tI I PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR I i I CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1979 0 contempt case filed under Sections 10 to 12 of contempt of courts Act 1971 to punish.the respondents herein them for willful disobedience of the orders in wp No.1 1 859 12022, dt.'1 5 3.2022.
Between:
P.Ramchandraiah, S/o Late Buchanna aged about 57 years(As per Service Register), Retired Pump Operator, Rajendeinagar Circle, GHMC,HVOJTaOaO. ...PETITIONER(S) AND I
1. shri Aravind Kumar, rAS, , reams-principal secretary, state of reranoana. [vrA and UD Department, Secretariat Buildings Hyderabdd.
2. Shri Lokesh Kumar, lAS, Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad.
3 P,fi !lg_r]-r,^ Deputy Com.missioner, Rajendernagar Circte, Greater Hyderabad Muntctpat corporalion, Hyderabad.
...CONTEMNORS Counsel for the Petitioner(s): SRl. p RAGHAVENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.2 and 3: SRI T CHANDRASEKHAR RAO, Standing Counsel for GHMC (Services) counsel for the Respondent No.1: cp FoR MUNtclpALtflES AND uRBAil DEV. The Court made the following: ORDER a I
Tiltt t{oN't}LE SIil,tt s'n(-E't'. vtNoD KtiNrAR CONTEN{l'l CIAS[. No. l979ol 2 022
ORDER
This ()onternpt (lase. is lllcd to sumnon thc rcspondcnts and punish them lor willfll disobctlience ol'thc ordcr.s passed by this Court in W.P.No.l I 589 o1'2022 dr, I 5-()l-2011 2.
Learned Standing Counscl for Municipalitie s submits that the disciplinary procccdinus iniLirrterl asainst thc- pcririoncr. on conduct of enquiry by the Encluiry Olficcr. has becn droppcd as thc sarne are not proved vide letter dt.08-09-2011 as lorwarded by the trnquiry Officer to the Commissionel of (lreater I Ir tlerabad Municipalitl L In view of the sr-rbmission rnade, since the Enquiry Officer had recorded his findings dropping the disciplinary proceedings, the respondent-authorities are direcred to give eft'ect to the said proceedings as expeditiously as possible, pref'erably within a period of four (04) weeks from the date hereof, sincc it is contended by the petitioner that showing the pendency of disciplinary proceedings, the respondentauthorities have not scttled his rctirerrent beneflts till date, though the petitioner had retired way back in l0 I6.
/
I Subjcct to the abot e directions. this Conterrpt Case is closed' No costs.
As a scquel. the nrisccllaneous petitiotrs, if any pending, shall stand closed Sd/. M. MANJULA DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,
1. Shri Aravind Kumar, IAS' ' reams-Principal Secretary' State of Telangana' MA and UD Department, s""'"ti'iit Buildinls Hyderabad'
2. Shri Lokesh Kumar, IAS' Commissioner' Greater Hyderabad Municipal CorPoration, HYderaDao'
3. Sri Jagan, , Deputy Commissioner' Rajendernagar Circle' Greater Hyderabad " iliffiip"i'iorPbraiion' HYderabad'
4. One CC to SRI' P RAGHAVENDRA REDDY Advocate IOPUCI t 1U","*+::S5J"?5Jr'il,'"rPALrrrES AND URBAN DEV' Hish court ror the
6. One CC to SRI T CHANDRASEKHAR RAO' SC FOR GHMC ISERVICESI
7. Two CD CoPies GS ?c,\4l.
PR
HIGH COURT DATED:3011212022 ''' l-r\ ,i *..
,,tii.'." ';' "
/- 'tr"
/4-ir tottAY?
\:
0n
ORDER
CC.No.1979 of 2022 ?c\q'
\%\5\,-e CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE