APHC010097652021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 524/2021 Between: V K Jaya Kumar ...PETITIONER AND K Ramesh and Others ...CONTEMNOR(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G RAJU Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. D.KASIM SAHEB(SC FOR MUNICIPALITIES SERVICE 2. The Court made the following: ORDER The above contempt case is filed complaining non-implementation of order dated 25.11.2020 in W.P.No.21750 of 2020. 2. The petitioner filed the above writ petition to declare the inaction of the respondents in considering his candidature for promotion to the post of Head Master Grade-II against Roster Point No.7 meant for Scheduled Caste General (SC-G) as per Rule 22 of A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules and as per G.O.Ms.No.5 dated 14.02.2003, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. The said writ petition was disposed of on 25.11.2020 and the operation portion of the order reads thus: “3. Upon hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents, this writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 3 and 4 to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 09.11.2020 and 10.11.2020 with reference to his promotion to the post of Head Master Grade-II with reference to a particular roster point in the first cycle, strictly in accordance with law and applicable rules, without making any deviation within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and dispose of the same.” 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the contempt case, it was pleaded that the order has not been complied with. 5. Counter affidavit was filed by the 2nd respondent. Along with counter affidavit, the proceedings vide R.O.C.No.625/2016/A6, dated 18.03.2021 was filed. A perusal of the said proceedings would indicate that 1st respondent passed a speaking order in pursuance of the order in the aforementioned writ petition, rejecting the claim of the petitioner. 6. Since a speaking order is passed by assigning reasons, this Court does not find any violation of order dated 25.11.2020 in W.P.No.21750 of 2020. 7. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is Closed giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the proceedings vide R.O.C.No.625/2016/A6, dated 18.03.2021, if he feels aggrieved. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI PVD