APHC010361552025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1833/2025 Between: 1. KALLA MURALI, S/O. SURYANARAYANA, (LATE) AGE 35 YEARS, WORKING AS WORK INSPECTOR O/O. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER II WATER SUPPLY AND MAINTENANCE G.V.M.C., VISAKHAPATNAM ...PETITIONER AND 1. S SURESH KUMAR IAS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT. MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT A. P.RADESH SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR 2. SRI M PRABHAKAR RAO, ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF, PUBLIC HEALTH, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR ...CONTEMNOR(S): Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may be pleased to Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P V RAMANA 2 Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. 3 The Court made the following order: Petitioner filed W.P.No.5887 of 2024 questioning the action of the respondents in not considering his case for promotion to the post of Municipal Assistant Engineer treating him as technical personnel provided under G.O.Rt.No.595 HMA&UD dated 22.09.1977 and not extending the benefits, which was extended in favour of seven other similarly situated persons to be illegal and arbitrary. The said writ petition came to be disposed by order dated 20.03.2025 in terms of order dated 30.03.2022 passed in W.P.No.3314 of 2021. 2. The operative portion of the order dated 30.03.2021 passed in W.P.No.3314 of 2021, reads as follows: 21. The writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is quashed, with the following further directions: (i) the 1st respondent is directed by issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to consider the petitioner’s case for appointment on the post of Municipal Assistant Engineer, in accordance with law, if the petitioner is otherwise eligible for such appointment, under Rule 3(b)(ii) of the Rules, 1977 by a reasoned and speaking order, and his case shall not be rejected on the ground that he is ‘Fitter’. ii) The above exercise shall be done within a period of two months from the date of production of copy of this order before respondent No.1. No order as to costs. 4 3. Now by Memo No.5887/E4(1)/2025, dated 07.05.2025, the 2nd respondent in writ petition has passed speaking orders, rejecting the case of the petitioner for promotion. The present contempt is filed alleging violation of the orders passed by this Court dated 20.03.2025 in W.P.No.5887 of 2024. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions contending that the speaking order rejecting the case of the petitioner for promotion is in clear violation of the direction issued by this Court. 5. This Court having considered the said submissions and having gone through the documents filed along with the contempt case, is of the opinion that the order passed by this Court, which is alleged to be violated, clearly directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion subject to his eligibility in accordance with law, now inasmuch as the 2nd respondent in writ petition has passed speaking order considering the case on merits, it cannot be contended violation of order passed. 6. Accordingly, this Court does not find any violation in orders passed, the contempt case is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to challenge the memo dated 07.05.2025 by which the case of the petitioner has been rejected for promotion. 5 As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date: 25.07.2025 ANS 6 224 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1833/2025 Date: 25.07.2025 ANS