SYED BALESHAHE (M) , vs D/O POSTS (M) ,

CP/40/2021 Page 1 of 3 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH CP/020/40/2021 in OA/020/747/2016 HYDERABAD, this the 17th day of August, 2021 Hon’ble Mr.

Ashish Kalia, Judl.

Member Hon’ble Mr.

N.

Neihsial, Admn.

Member Mr.

Syed Baleshahe, S/o.

Jani Sab, aged about 60 years, Postal Assistant (Retd.), Department of Posts, Machilipatnam. ...Petitioner (By Advocate: Sri K.

Sudhaker Reddy) Vs.

Mr.

B.V.N.

Suresh, The Superintendent Post Offices, Machilipatnam Division, Machilipatnam – 521 001. ...Contemnor (By Advocate: Smt K.

Rajitha, Sr.

CGSC) --- CP/40/2021 Page 2 of 3 ORAL ORDER (As per Hon’ble Mr.

Member) Through Video Conferencing: This Contempt Petition is listed today.

This Tribunal has passed the following the order dated 25.07.2016 in OA No.747/2016: “The respondents are directed not to take any final decision on the basis of Inquiry Officer’s Report without the leave of this Tribunal.” The departmental proceedings were allowed to be continued but final order may not be passed.

Thereafter, in another OA/860/2015, Division Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice K.

Shrivatsava has passed the order that the proceedings may be concluded at the earliest with the cooperation of the contempt petitioner.

2 Sri K.

Sudhaker Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner argued at length and submitted that it is a wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Tribunal, without getting the interim order vacated.

3.

On the contrary, learned counsel Smt K.

CGSC has also argued at length and drawn our attention to various orders and pleadings in the Contempt Petition and has submitted that the order passed by the respondents was in accordance with their understanding and they were bound to conclude the enquiry.

Conclusion means the final order also, according to her.

CP/40/2021 Page 3 of 3 4.

Heard Sri K.

Sudhaker Reddy, learned counsel for the applicant and Smt.

K.

Rajitha, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

5. ndents.

5.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the above discussion and on perusal of record, we feel that the Tribunal’s order has been upheld by subsequent order passed in OA/860/2015 and perhaps, if violation is there, it is not wilful.

In that condition, we hereby caution respondents that in future whenever such situation arises, they must approach the Tribunal.

6.

With the above observation, we close the present Contempt Petition. (N.

NEIHSIAL) (ASHISH KALIA) ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER /al/