D SUBRAMANYAM Vs. A V G KRISHNA MURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This contempt petition is filed by the petitioner alleging that the respondents have failed to implement me judgment of this Court in W.P.No.6562/79 dated 27-6-1980 and therefore, the respondents namely A.V.G. Krishna Murthy, Secretary A.P. Legislature, Hyderabad and C. Venkatesan, Special Secretary, Andhra Pradesh Legislature, Hyderabad are liable for contempt of Court.

(2.) It is necessary to refer to the facts in brief: The petitioner along with 10 others filed a writ petition No.6562/79 challenging G.O.Ms.No.82/79 dated 4th September, 1979 of the Legislature Department on the ground,amongst others, that there is non-compliance of Art.187 of the Constitution of India. Art. 187 empowers to frame rules and regulations regulating the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to the Secretarial staff of the Assembly or the Council and any rules framed will be subject to the provisions of any law made under the said clause No rules were framed under Art.187. Under Art. 187(3)G.O.Ms.No.608 was issued for the composite State of Madras, regulating the recruitment and conditions of service of the Secretarial staff, After the formation of State of Andhra Pradesh, G.O.Ms.No.1315 GAD dated 28-8-1958 was issued regulating the recruitment and service conditions of Legislative Assembly Secretariat. Thereafter, Rules were framed in G.O.Ms.No.82 of 1979 dated 4-9-1979 which were framed under Art. 187 (3) of the Constitution of India. The said Rules are violative of Arts. 14 and 187 of the Constitution of India. On a consideration of the respective contentions raised by the petitioners as well as the respondents, this Court held that the impugned G.O.Ms.No.82 / 79 is violative of Art. 187 of the Constitution of India and liable to be quashed and accordingly it was quashed. While quashing the G.O. leave was granted to go in appeal to the Supreme Court under Art. 133 (1) and Art. 132 of the Constitution of India. When the appeal Civil Appeal No.2686 of 1980 came up before the Supreme Court on 15th February, 1995 the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal on the ground that due to lapse of 15 years, no useful purpose will be served by going into the merits of the controversy.

(3.) Since the Supreme Court dismissed the Civil Appeal on 15-2-1995, the present Contempt Petition was filed on 22-9-1995 alleging that the judgment of the High Court in W.P.No.6562/79 has become final and the impugned G.O. was quashed on the ground that there is non-compliance of Art.187 of the Constitution of India and inspite of that the petitioners case was not considered for purpose of promotion in accordance with the old Rules, namely, in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.1315 GAD dated 28-8-1958 and the subsequent G.Os. issued up to the G.O.Ms.No.82/79 dated 4-9-1979 either amending or modifying the G.O.Ms.No.131 5. On the other hand, the respondents have issued Ad hoc Rules and promoting the persons in accordance with the Ad hoc Rules and, thus they violated the judgment of the High Court in W.P. No.6562/79.