LINGA RANJITH KUMAR Vs. AJAY MISHRA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHEN an order has been passed by this Court, it is the bounden duty of the respondents/officials to implement the orders of the Court. The respondents after receiving the orders of this Court and in the process of implementing the same cannot reopen the matter and start examining the matter afresh. There is no need to examine as to whether the petitioner's case is in accordance with Government Orders or Government Memos issued from time to time. They cannot sit over judgments upon the orders passed by this Court. It is nothing but disobeying and disrespecting the orders of this Court. Whatever grounds, the officials have to take, they must take in their counter and at least when the writ petition or the matter is heard by the Court. In fact, after giving notice to the concerned Government Pleaders, the matters will be listed. They had given an opportunity to argue the matter before the Court. Even otherwise, the remedy leftover to them is to file vacate stay petition, review petition or an appeal before the Division Bench or to approach the apex Court. Even where there is a direction to consider the case of the petitioner, the respondents have to consider the case positively. To consider does not mean to reject on one or other untenable ground. It is also most unfortunate to observe that in many cases, the officials are filing writ appeals and approaching the apex Court and wasting huge public money on the litigation. Probably, the cost of litigation may be much more than what the amount, the Government has to spent by implementing the orders of the Court. In fact, the Chief Secretaries, Government of Telangana and Government of Andhra Pradesh should examine at least 100 cases where the officials have approached the apex Court and lost SLPs. It is better to fix the responsibility on such officials, who have given wrong advise to file SLPs without examining the correct legal position. It is the public money which they are spending by flying over to Delhi and in filing SLPs and other cases. Whenever an order has been passed by this Court, the respondents have to implement the orders of this Court. They need not and they should not examine the merits and demerits of the case at this stage. They should not examine whether the petitioner is eligible for relief granted by this Court. Once constitutional Court holds that the petitioner is entitled for a particular relief, the officials have no business to say that the petitioner is not entitled to that relief on any ground. Only a Division Bench of this Court or the apex Court can say that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief granted or that the order has to be modified or some other relief has to be granted.

(2.) NOW the Government Pleader for GAD submits that the Collector and District Magistrate, Nizamabad has addressed a letter to him stating that the Government has taken a decision to offer amount of Rs. 5,00,000/ - ex -gratia/monetary compensation to the petitioner in lieu of job. The Government and the respondents have no right to say so even if any Government Order is issued or Government Memo is issued by the Government the same cannot override by the orders passed by this Court.