APHC010249432020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 886/2020 Between: Ch Rajasekhar ...PETITIONER AND Sri Kumar Vishwajeet Ips and Others ...CONTEMNOR(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K R SRINIVAS Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. G V S KISHORE KUMAR 2. N ASWARTHA NARAYANA The Court made the following: ORDER Heard Sri K.R.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.V.S.Kishore Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The above contempt case is filed complaining non-implementation of order dated 24.09.2019 in W.P.No.14478 of 2019. 3. The petitioner filed the said writ petition to declare the action of respondents in not considering his case for promotion to the post of DSP. The said writ petition was disposed of on 24.09.2019. The operative portion of the order reads thus: “4. Hence, in view of the above circumstances, there shall be a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, General Administration (Ser-C) Department dated 10.06.1999.” 4. Thereafter, the above contempt case was filed. 5. A counter-affidavit was filed by the 2nd respondent. Along with the counter affidavit, the proceedings issued by the Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, Mangalagiri vide Rc.No.615/G3/2020, dated 30.11.2020 was filed. A perusal of the said proceedings would indicate that, in pursuance of the order, in the aforementioned writ petition, the case of the petitioner for promotion was considered and the DPC did not recommend his case for promotion as DSP (civil), and hence, the petitioner is not entitled to promotion. 6. Sri K.R.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, would contend that the speaking order is not in compliance with the order passed in the writ petition, and the respondents failed to implement the order in the writ petition in its letter and spirit. 7. In J.S.Parihar Vs. Ganpat Duggar and Others1, the Hon’ble Apex Court observed as under: “….once there is an order passed by the Government on the basis of the directions issued by the Court, there arises a fresh cause of action to seek redressal in an appropriate forum. The preparation of the seniority list may be wrong or may be right or may or may not be in 1 (1996) 6 SCC 291 conformity with the directions. But that would be a fresh cause of action for the aggrieved party to avail of the opportunity of judicial review. But that cannot be considered to be the willful violation of the order. After re-exercising the judicial review in contempt proceedings, afresh direction by the learned Single Judge cannot be given to redraw the seniority list. In other words, the learned Judge was exercising the jurisdiction to consider the matter on merits in the contempt proceedings. It would not be permissible under Section 12 of the Act.” 8. Thus, as seen from the expression of the Hon’ble Apex Court, since a speaking order was passed by proceedings dated 30.11.2020 in compliance with the order in the writ petition, the petitioner should have challenged the said order. 9. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any violation of the order dated 24.09.2019 in W.P.No.14478 of 2019. 10. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is Closed. No costs. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the proceedings vide Rc.No.615/G3/2020, dated 30.11.2020, before the appropriate forum. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Note: Furnish copy in 3 days. B/O PVD