ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON SMT. K. KAMALA KUMARI V/S MR NANDRU GURAVAIAH

AMARAVATI, India, May 18 -- Andhra Pradesh High Court issued the following order on April 16:

1. It is observed that the matter is posted under the caption 'for dismissal' for non-appearance of counsel for the petitioner on several occasions. Even though there is a direction to list the matter under the caption 'For dismissal', but listed under the caption 'for hearing'. Further, even today there is no representation for the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent filed counter-affidavit stating that respondent Nos.6 and 7 are not interfering with the service conditions of the petitioner at any point of time. Further, it is stated as under:

"5. I submit that I am in no way connected with the affairs of the 7th respondent Village Organization and I have no control or authority whatsoever over the VOA of the 7th respondent organizations and I am in no way interfering with the functions of the VAOs of the Village Organizations. I submit that I am in complete obedience of the orders of the Hon'ble Court and have not interfered with the duties of the petitioner VOA who is under the Administrative Control of the 7th respondent.

6. I submit that allegations of the petitioner that after receipt of the above order the petitioner approached the respondent on 07.01.2023 and the allegation that I am not inclined to receive the same and bluntly rejected the same saying that there is no need to honour the High Court direction is all false and baseless. The allegations that I have not agreed to update the name of the petitioner in online official website and not allowing to continue as book keeper is all false and baseless. I submit that I am in no way connected with the affairs of the 7th respondent Village Organization and I have no control or authority whatsoever over the VOA of the 7 th respondent organizations and I am in no way interfering with the functions of the VAOs of the Village Organizations."

3. In view of the clear and categorical instructions of the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent never interfered with the service conditions of the petitioner, the petitioner did not made out any contempt alleged to have been committed by the respondents. In the absence of any evidence put forth by the petitioner and in view of the submission of counsel for the respondents, it is clear that there is no element of any violation or disobedience on the part of the respondent. Hence, this Court is of the considered opinion that no further orders are necessary under the provisions of the contempt of Courts Act.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=tuqye3PhFs%2BBDn75ghiOpALKud6oieopDXSNY5nCsycCo7KG%2FtM0fMH5SQukNzr6&caseno=CC/562/2023&cCode=1&cino=APHC010036232023&state_code=2&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.