APHC010483852023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CONTEMPT CASE No.5308 of 2023 Between: Sunkara Daramma ...PETITIONER AND Mohan Lal Hirwal and others ...CONTEMNOR(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A. SYAM SUNDAR REDDY Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA 2. O. UDAYA KUMAR (CENTRAL GOVT. COUNSEL) The Court made the following: 2 VS,J C.C.No.5308 of 2023 ORDER : This contempt case is filed complaining willful disobedience on the part of the respondents in complying with the order dated 07.08.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.19183 of 2023. 2. The aforesaid writ petition was filed seeking the following relief: “..to issue appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 5th Respondent in passing the impugned Rejection Order dt. 18.07.2023 rejecting and declaring the Petitioner‟s candidature as disqualified for the post of Constable/GD on the ground of variation of Domicile District name as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the principles of natural justice and violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under article 14, 19 and 21 and consequently direct the Respondents to rectify the mistake in application as it is a curable mistake and to permit the Petitioner to undergo selection process.” 3. Since the issue involved in the aforesaid writ petition was squarely covered by the order dated 27.04.2022 passed by this Court in W.P.No.3537 of 2021, this Court, by the order dated 07.08.2023, has disposed of the writ petition in terms of the said order dated 27.04.2022 in W.P.No.3537 of 2021. 4. The operative portion of the order dated 27.04.2022 in W.P.No.3537 of 2021 reads as under: “12. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed setting aside the impugned proceedings dated 09.03.2021 in RII-1/2020- GCRRY-PO issued by the 5th respondent and the respondents are directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner treating his District Domicile as „West Godavari‟ for all practical purposes, 3 VS,J C.C.No.5308 of 2023 and permit him to undergo the process of selection/appointment, if any, left pursuant to the notification dated 21.07.2018, in case the petitioner is otherwise eligible.” 5. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr. Challa Dhanamjaya, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, has stated that in compliance with the order of this Court, the petitioner was permitted to participate in the selection process by treating her district domicile as Visakhapatnam. He has furnished a copy of the proceedings dated 12.02.2025 issued by the Director General of Police, Group Centre, CRPF, Rangareddy, to show that in compliance with the order of this Court, the petitioner was called for Document Verification/Detailed Medical Examination & Review Medical Examination conducted from 05.02.2025 to 12.02.2025 and was found fit. 6. In view of the same, since the order of this Court has been complied with, as noted above, no further adjudication is required in this contempt case. 7. Accordingly, this contempt case is closed. No order as to costs. Consequently, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this case shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V. SUJATHA Date: 13.02.2025 IBL 4 VS,J C.C.No.5308 of 2023 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA CONTEMPT CASE No. 5308 of 2023 Dt: 13.02.2025 IBL