APHC010340762024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA CONTEMPT CASE C.C.No:3362 of 2024 Between: 1. B CHAITANYA, D/O. B.APPA RAO AGED ABOUT AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164842, STAFF NO.460233, HRMS ID.NO.7019903 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, 2. K.ABHISHEK, S/O. K.RAJA RAO AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164046, STAFF NO.460237, HRMS ID.NO.7019063 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, RAJHAMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3. G.LAKSHMI, G.LAKSHMI C/O. P.SATYA RAO AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164193 STAFF NO.460239, HRMS ID.7019170 EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS OFFICE, VIZIANAGARAM. 4. A.SURYA KIRAN, S/O. GOPAL RAO AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT, STAFF NO.460249, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, RAVULPALEM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. M.PRANEETHA, D/O. M.PRASADA RAO AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164044, STAFF NO.460243, HRMS ID.7019062 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, AMALAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 6. D.TEJASWINI, D/O. D.CH.SEKHAR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164197, STAFF NO.460245, HRMS ID.NO.7019172 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE FOURTEEN DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD CONTEMPT CASE NOS: 3362, 3365 & 3366 OF 2024 B CHAITANYA, D/O. B.APPA RAO AGED ABOUT AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164842, STAFF NO.460233, HRMS ID.NO.7019903 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, VIZIANAGARAM,VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT K.ABHISHEK, S/O. K.RAJA RAO AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164046, STAFF NO.460237, HRMS ID.NO.7019063 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, RAJHAMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. G.LAKSHMI, G.LAKSHMI C/O. P.SATYA RAO AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164193 STAFF NO.460239, HRMS ID.7019170 EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS OFFICE, VIZIANAGARAM. A.SURYA KIRAN, S/O. GOPAL RAO AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCC R ASSISTANT, STAFF NO.460249, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, RAVULPALEM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. M.PRANEETHA, D/O. M.PRASADA RAO AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164044, STAFF NO.460243, HRMS ID.7019062 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, MALAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. D.TEJASWINI, D/O. D.CH.SEKHAR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164197, STAFF NO.460245, HRMS ID.NO.7019172 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3328] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA B CHAITANYA, D/O. B.APPA RAO AGED ABOUT AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164842, STAFF NO.460233, HRMS ID.NO.7019903 DEPOT VIZIANAGARAM,VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. K.ABHISHEK, S/O. K.RAJA RAO AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164046, STAFF NO.460237, HRMS ID.NO.7019063 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, G.LAKSHMI, G.LAKSHMI C/O. P.SATYA RAO AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164193 STAFF NO.460239, HRMS ID.7019170 A.SURYA KIRAN, S/O. GOPAL RAO AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCC R ASSISTANT, STAFF NO.460249, DEPOT MANAGER M.PRANEETHA, D/O. M.PRASADA RAO AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164044, STAFF NO.460243, HRMS ID.7019062 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, D.TEJASWINI, D/O. D.CH.SEKHAR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164197, STAFF NO.460245, HRMS ID.NO.7019172 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, 2 AMALAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 7. K.RAMYA, D/O. N.RAJESH AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) STAFF NO.460248, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, KAKINDADA DISTRICT. 8. CH. GANESHWARA RAO, S/O. CH.SRINIVASA RAO AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164040, STAFF NO.460242, HRMS ID.NO.7019061, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, RAJHAMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 9. S.SHOBHA RANI, W/O. V.V.GOPALAM, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15165684, STAFF NO.460240, HRMS ID.NO.7019856 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, PARVATHIPURAM, MANNEM DISTRICT. 10. P.DASARATNAM, W/O. A.S.KUMAR AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15167868, STAFF NO.460232, HRMS ID.NO.7022092, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, SRIKAKULAM-LL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 11. LAHARI SAHU, D/O. M.SAHU AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164486, STAFF NO.460241, HRMS ID.NO.7019262, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, KAKINDA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 12. S. PREM VANI, D/O S.S. RAO, AGED 20 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164463, STAFF NO.460246, HRMS ID.NO.7019251, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, KAKINDA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. SRI CH D TIRUMALA RAO, S/O NOT KNOWN. AGED MAJOR, MANAGING DIRECTOR VIJAYAWADA THE AP STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION 2. SRI BRAHMANANDA REDDY, S/O NOT KNOWN. AGED MAJOR, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, VIZIANAGARAM. 3 3. SUDHA BINDU MATCHA, W/O NOT KNOWN, AGED MAJOR, THE CHIEF PERSONNEL MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ZONE-1, VIZIANAGARAM. ...CONTEMNOR(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. RAMESH BABU PEDAPALLI Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. M SOLOMON RAJU C.C.No.3365 of 2024 Between: 1. S KRISHNA CHAITANYA RAJU, S/O S S RAO AGED ABOUT AGED 23 ABOUT YEARS OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT PERSONAL CFMS ID NO 15164198 STAFF NO 460247 HRMS ID NO 7019173 DISTRICT PUBLIC TRANSPORT OFFICERS OFFICE DR B R AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA ...PETITIONER AND 1. SRI CH D TIRUMALA RAO, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED MAJOR, MANAGING DIRECTOR, VIJAYAWADA THE AP STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION 2. SRI BRAHMANANDA REDDY, S/O NOT KNOWN. AGED MAJOR. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, VIZIANAGARAM. 3. SUDHA BINDU MATCHA, W/O NOT KNOWN. AGED MAJOR. THE CHIEF PERSONNEL MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ZONE-1, VIZIANAGARAM. ...CONTEMNOR(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 4 1. RAMESH BABU PEDAPALLI Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. M SOLOMON RAJU C.C.No.3366 of 2024 Between: 1. J SUPRIYA, D/O J MOHAN AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS JUNIOR ASSISTANT PERSONAL CFMS ID NO 15163553 STAFF NO 414258 HRMS ID NO 7018836 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE BHANAGANAPALLI 2. C HAMALATHA, D/O C C SUNKANNA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS JUNIOR ASSISTANT PERSONAL CFMS ID NO 1516462 STAFF NO 414262 HRMS ID NO 7019250 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE RAYACHOTI KADAPA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. SRI CH D TIRUMALA RAO, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED MAJOR, MANAGING DIRECTOR VIJAYAWADA THE AP STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION 2. SRI BRAHMANANDA REDDY, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED MAJOR, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, VIZIANAGARAM. 3. PUNNAKA RAJA GAJALAKSHMI, W/O NOT KNOWN, AGED MAJOR, THE CHIEF PERSONNEL MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT THE AP STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION ZONE IV KADAPA ...CONTEMNOR(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. RAMESH BABU PEDAPALLI Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 5 1. M SOLOMON RAJU The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Heard Smt. S.A.V. Ratnam, learned Counsel appearing online on behalf of Sri P. Ramesh Babu, learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Sri M. Solomon Raju, learned Counsel for the Respondents appearing online. 2. C.C.Nos.3362 & 3366 of 2024 are filed in respect of non-compliance of the Common Order dated 05.02.2024 in W.P.No.2622 & 2765 of 2024. C.C.No.3365 of 2024 is filed against non-compliance of the Order passed by this Court dated 26.02.2024 in W.P.No.3712 of 2024. 3. The facts involved in these three Contempt Cases are identical. Hence, the three Contempt Cases are disposed of by this Common Order. 4. Facts as projected in the Writ Petitions are that all the Writ Petitioners were appointed as Junior Assistants under the Compassionate Appointment Scheme that was made available by Respondent No.1 Corporation. All the Writ Petitioners were kept on probation for a period of two years. 5. Having regard to the nature of the duties assigned to the Writ Petitioners, they were subjected to a Training Programme called ‘Induction Training’. The said training is imparted for a period of three months for the purpose of Junior Assistant (Personnel) at the Transport Academy, Vidyadharapuram, Vijayawada. The Writ Petitioners, after being provisionally selected for the post of Junior Assistant (Personnel), were issued Conditional Appointments on a temporary basis. 6. After subjecting the Writ Petitioners for Induction Training for a period of three months, an Evaluation Test was conducted wherein the Respondent Authorities have found the Writ Petitioners as having failed in the Evaluation Test and had consequently terminated their services. 6 7. When the Writ Petitions were filed, this Court, having prima facie found that the balance of convenience is in favour of the Writ Petitioners, this Court had suspended the Impugned Orders of Termination until further Orders, with a direction to the Respondents to subject all the Writ Petitioners for one more round of Induction Training. 8. In compliance with the direction given by this Court, the Writ Petitioners were subjected to Induction Training again. Thereafter, the Writ Petitioners were subjected to an Evaluation Test. The Respondent Authorities have once again terminated the services of the Writ Petitioners on the basis that they have failed to qualify in the second Evaluation Test, which was conducted after the second Induction Training given to the Writ Petitioners under the Orders of this Court dated 05.02.2024 and 26.02.2024. 9. Complaining of the removal of the Writ Petitioners from service, subject to the outcome of the second Evaluation Test, the Writ Petitioners have filed the present Contempt Case, contending that the Respondent Authorities have no authority to terminate the services of the Petitioners during the subsistence of the Order of suspension of the Termination Orders. 10. The Respondents filed Counter-Affidavits stating that, in compliance with the Interim Orders of this Court dated 05.02.2024 and 26.02.2024, the Writ Petitioners were imparted Induction Training for the second time. During the training, the Petitioners were continued in service as the earlier Termination Orders were suspended by this Court. 11. It is submitted by the Respondents that, after subjecting the Writ Petitioners to the Induction Training for the second time, consequently, the Petitioners were subjected to the Evaluation Test also for the second time, wherein the Petitioners were unsuccessful in passing the Evaluation Test. Therefore, it is contended that the conduct of the Evaluation Test for the second time is a new cause of action, where the Writ Petitioners could not 7 emerge successful and therefore, in the natural course, the services of the Writ Petitioners were terminated. It is stated that the Evaluation Test is an integral part of the Induction Training Programme that was ordered by this Court on 05.02.2024 and 26.02.2024, and the Respondents have scrupulously complied with the same, and therefore, their actions do not attract Contempt of Court Proceedings against them. 12. This Court has perused the Interim Orders passed on 05.02.2024 and 26.02.2024. At the admission stage, this Court considered it appropriate to grant the Writ Petitioners one more opportunity to undergo training and to be subjected to the Evaluation Test, which is an integral part of the Induction Training Programme itself. 13. Keeping this fact in mind, this Court, while suspending the Orders of Termination of the Writ Petitioners, had directed the Respondent Authorities to subject the Writ Petitioners to Induction Training once more. This Court is in agreement with the submission of the Respondents that the ‘Evaluation Test’ is an integral part of the ‘Induction Training Programme’, and therefore, termination of the Writ Petitioners due to their failure in the ‘Evaluation Test’ would not attract Contempt of Court proceedings against the Respondents herein. 14. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the view that these Contempt Cases are devoid of any merit. 15. Accordingly, these Contempt Cases are dismissed. No order as to costs. 16. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 14.11.2025 DSV 8 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD CONTEMPT CASE NOs: 3362, 3365 & 3366 of 2024 14.11.2025 DSV 9 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI MAIN CASE No. CONTEMPT CASE NOs: 3362, 3365 & 3366 of 2025 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No DATE ORDER Office Note 14.11.2025 GRKP, J Contempt Cases are dismissed. (vide separate common order) ___________ GRKP, J DSV APHC010340762024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA CONTEMPT CASE C.C.No:3362 of 2024 Between: 1. B CHAITANYA, D/O. B.APPA RAO AGED ABOUT AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164842, STAFF NO.460233, HRMS ID.NO.7019903 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, 2. K.ABHISHEK, S/O. K.RAJA RAO AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164046, STAFF NO.460237, HRMS ID.NO.7019063 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, RAJHAMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3. G.LAKSHMI, G.LAKSHMI C/O. P.SATYA RAO AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164193 STAFF NO.460239, HRMS ID.7019170 EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS OFFICE, VIZIANAGARAM. 4. A.SURYA KIRAN, S/O. GOPAL RAO AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT, STAFF NO.460249, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, RAVULPALEM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. M.PRANEETHA, D/O. M.PRASADA RAO AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164044, STAFF NO.460243, HRMS ID.7019062 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, AMALAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 6. D.TEJASWINI, D/O. D.CH.SEKHAR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164197, STAFF NO.460245, HRMS ID.NO.7019172 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE FOURTEEN DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD CONTEMPT CASE NOS: 3362, 3365 & 3366 OF 2024 B CHAITANYA, D/O. B.APPA RAO AGED ABOUT AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164842, STAFF NO.460233, HRMS ID.NO.7019903 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, VIZIANAGARAM,VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT K.ABHISHEK, S/O. K.RAJA RAO AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164046, STAFF NO.460237, HRMS ID.NO.7019063 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, RAJHAMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. G.LAKSHMI, G.LAKSHMI C/O. P.SATYA RAO AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164193 STAFF NO.460239, HRMS ID.7019170 EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS OFFICE, VIZIANAGARAM. A.SURYA KIRAN, S/O. GOPAL RAO AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCC R ASSISTANT, STAFF NO.460249, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, RAVULPALEM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. M.PRANEETHA, D/O. M.PRASADA RAO AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164044, STAFF NO.460243, HRMS ID.7019062 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, MALAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. D.TEJASWINI, D/O. D.CH.SEKHAR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164197, STAFF NO.460245, HRMS ID.NO.7019172 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3328] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA B CHAITANYA, D/O. B.APPA RAO AGED ABOUT AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164842, STAFF NO.460233, HRMS ID.NO.7019903 DEPOT VIZIANAGARAM,VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. K.ABHISHEK, S/O. K.RAJA RAO AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164046, STAFF NO.460237, HRMS ID.NO.7019063 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, G.LAKSHMI, G.LAKSHMI C/O. P.SATYA RAO AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164193 STAFF NO.460239, HRMS ID.7019170 A.SURYA KIRAN, S/O. GOPAL RAO AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCC R ASSISTANT, STAFF NO.460249, DEPOT MANAGER M.PRANEETHA, D/O. M.PRASADA RAO AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164044, STAFF NO.460243, HRMS ID.7019062 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, D.TEJASWINI, D/O. D.CH.SEKHAR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164197, STAFF NO.460245, HRMS ID.NO.7019172 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, 2 AMALAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 7. K.RAMYA, D/O. N.RAJESH AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) STAFF NO.460248, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, KAKINDADA DISTRICT. 8. CH. GANESHWARA RAO, S/O. CH.SRINIVASA RAO AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164040, STAFF NO.460242, HRMS ID.NO.7019061, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, RAJHAMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 9. S.SHOBHA RANI, W/O. V.V.GOPALAM, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15165684, STAFF NO.460240, HRMS ID.NO.7019856 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, PARVATHIPURAM, MANNEM DISTRICT. 10. P.DASARATNAM, W/O. A.S.KUMAR AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15167868, STAFF NO.460232, HRMS ID.NO.7022092, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, SRIKAKULAM-LL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 11. LAHARI SAHU, D/O. M.SAHU AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164486, STAFF NO.460241, HRMS ID.NO.7019262, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, KAKINDA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 12. S. PREM VANI, D/O S.S. RAO, AGED 20 YEARS. JUNIOR ASSISTANT (PERSONAL) CFMS, ID.NO.15164463, STAFF NO.460246, HRMS ID.NO.7019251, DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE, KAKINDA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. SRI CH D TIRUMALA RAO, S/O NOT KNOWN. AGED MAJOR, MANAGING DIRECTOR VIJAYAWADA THE AP STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION 2. SRI BRAHMANANDA REDDY, S/O NOT KNOWN. AGED MAJOR, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, VIZIANAGARAM. 3 3. SUDHA BINDU MATCHA, W/O NOT KNOWN, AGED MAJOR, THE CHIEF PERSONNEL MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ZONE-1, VIZIANAGARAM. ...CONTEMNOR(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. RAMESH BABU PEDAPALLI Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. M SOLOMON RAJU C.C.No.3365 of 2024 Between: 1. S KRISHNA CHAITANYA RAJU, S/O S S RAO AGED ABOUT AGED 23 ABOUT YEARS OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT PERSONAL CFMS ID NO 15164198 STAFF NO 460247 HRMS ID NO 7019173 DISTRICT PUBLIC TRANSPORT OFFICERS OFFICE DR B R AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA ...PETITIONER AND 1. SRI CH D TIRUMALA RAO, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED MAJOR, MANAGING DIRECTOR, VIJAYAWADA THE AP STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION 2. SRI BRAHMANANDA REDDY, S/O NOT KNOWN. AGED MAJOR. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, VIZIANAGARAM. 3. SUDHA BINDU MATCHA, W/O NOT KNOWN. AGED MAJOR. THE CHIEF PERSONNEL MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ZONE-1, VIZIANAGARAM. ...CONTEMNOR(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 4 1. RAMESH BABU PEDAPALLI Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. M SOLOMON RAJU C.C.No.3366 of 2024 Between: 1. J SUPRIYA, D/O J MOHAN AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS JUNIOR ASSISTANT PERSONAL CFMS ID NO 15163553 STAFF NO 414258 HRMS ID NO 7018836 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE BHANAGANAPALLI 2. C HAMALATHA, D/O C C SUNKANNA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS JUNIOR ASSISTANT PERSONAL CFMS ID NO 1516462 STAFF NO 414262 HRMS ID NO 7019250 DEPOT MANAGER OFFICE RAYACHOTI KADAPA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. SRI CH D TIRUMALA RAO, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED MAJOR, MANAGING DIRECTOR VIJAYAWADA THE AP STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION 2. SRI BRAHMANANDA REDDY, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED MAJOR, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, VIZIANAGARAM. 3. PUNNAKA RAJA GAJALAKSHMI, W/O NOT KNOWN, AGED MAJOR, THE CHIEF PERSONNEL MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT THE AP STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION ZONE IV KADAPA ...CONTEMNOR(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. RAMESH BABU PEDAPALLI Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 5 1. M SOLOMON RAJU The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Heard Smt. S.A.V. Ratnam, learned Counsel appearing online on behalf of Sri P. Ramesh Babu, learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Sri M. Solomon Raju, learned Counsel for the Respondents appearing online. 2. C.C.Nos.3362 & 3366 of 2024 are filed in respect of non-compliance of the Common Order dated 05.02.2024 in W.P.No.2622 & 2765 of 2024. C.C.No.3365 of 2024 is filed against non-compliance of the Order passed by this Court dated 26.02.2024 in W.P.No.3712 of 2024. 3. The facts involved in these three Contempt Cases are identical. Hence, the three Contempt Cases are disposed of by this Common Order. 4. Facts as projected in the Writ Petitions are that all the Writ Petitioners were appointed as Junior Assistants under the Compassionate Appointment Scheme that was made available by Respondent No.1 Corporation. All the Writ Petitioners were kept on probation for a period of two years. 5. Having regard to the nature of the duties assigned to the Writ Petitioners, they were subjected to a Training Programme called ‘Induction Training’. The said training is imparted for a period of three months for the purpose of Junior Assistant (Personnel) at the Transport Academy, Vidyadharapuram, Vijayawada. The Writ Petitioners, after being provisionally selected for the post of Junior Assistant (Personnel), were issued Conditional Appointments on a temporary basis. 6. After subjecting the Writ Petitioners for Induction Training for a period of three months, an Evaluation Test was conducted wherein the Respondent Authorities have found the Writ Petitioners as having failed in the Evaluation Test and had consequently terminated their services. 6 7. When the Writ Petitions were filed, this Court, having prima facie found that the balance of convenience is in favour of the Writ Petitioners, this Court had suspended the Impugned Orders of Termination until further Orders, with a direction to the Respondents to subject all the Writ Petitioners for one more round of Induction Training. 8. In compliance with the direction given by this Court, the Writ Petitioners were subjected to Induction Training again. Thereafter, the Writ Petitioners were subjected to an Evaluation Test. The Respondent Authorities have once again terminated the services of the Writ Petitioners on the basis that they have failed to qualify in the second Evaluation Test, which was conducted after the second Induction Training given to the Writ Petitioners under the Orders of this Court dated 05.02.2024 and 26.02.2024. 9. Complaining of the removal of the Writ Petitioners from service, subject to the outcome of the second Evaluation Test, the Writ Petitioners have filed the present Contempt Case, contending that the Respondent Authorities have no authority to terminate the services of the Petitioners during the subsistence of the Order of suspension of the Termination Orders. 10. The Respondents filed Counter-Affidavits stating that, in compliance with the Interim Orders of this Court dated 05.02.2024 and 26.02.2024, the Writ Petitioners were imparted Induction Training for the second time. During the training, the Petitioners were continued in service as the earlier Termination Orders were suspended by this Court. 11. It is submitted by the Respondents that, after subjecting the Writ Petitioners to the Induction Training for the second time, consequently, the Petitioners were subjected to the Evaluation Test also for the second time, wherein the Petitioners were unsuccessful in passing the Evaluation Test. Therefore, it is contended that the conduct of the Evaluation Test for the second time is a new cause of action, where the Writ Petitioners could not 7 emerge successful and therefore, in the natural course, the services of the Writ Petitioners were terminated. It is stated that the Evaluation Test is an integral part of the Induction Training Programme that was ordered by this Court on 05.02.2024 and 26.02.2024, and the Respondents have scrupulously complied with the same, and therefore, their actions do not attract Contempt of Court Proceedings against them. 12. This Court has perused the Interim Orders passed on 05.02.2024 and 26.02.2024. At the admission stage, this Court considered it appropriate to grant the Writ Petitioners one more opportunity to undergo training and to be subjected to the Evaluation Test, which is an integral part of the Induction Training Programme itself. 13. Keeping this fact in mind, this Court, while suspending the Orders of Termination of the Writ Petitioners, had directed the Respondent Authorities to subject the Writ Petitioners to Induction Training once more. This Court is in agreement with the submission of the Respondents that the ‘Evaluation Test’ is an integral part of the ‘Induction Training Programme’, and therefore, termination of the Writ Petitioners due to their failure in the ‘Evaluation Test’ would not attract Contempt of Court proceedings against the Respondents herein. 14. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the view that these Contempt Cases are devoid of any merit. 15. Accordingly, these Contempt Cases are dismissed. No order as to costs. 16. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 14.11.2025 DSV 8 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD CONTEMPT CASE NOs: 3362, 3365 & 3366 of 2024 14.11.2025 DSV 9 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI MAIN CASE No. CONTEMPT CASE NOs: 3362, 3365 & 3366 of 2025 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No DATE ORDER Office Note 14.11.2025 GRKP, J Contempt Cases are dismissed. (vide separate common order) ___________ GRKP, J DSV