Hc Dismisses Abv’s Contempt Plea On Non-payment Of Salary, Legal News, ET LegalWorld – Legal Firms


The AP high court on Tuesday dismissed the contempt petition filed by former Intelligence chief AB Venkateswara Rao against the state government for not paying salary for the suspension period in accordance with the orders of the high court.

The high court observed that at this stage it cannot be concluded that the chief secretary wilfully disobeyed the court orders. The high court granted liberty to Rao to approach it for execution of its orders pertaining to pending salary.

The state government suspended Rao on allegations of irregularities in the procurement of surveillance equipment. Challenging the suspension orders, Rao first moved the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) which did not incline to interfere with the suspension orders. Later, Rao moved the high court challenging the orders of CAT and the high court allowed his petition holding that the suspension is illegal. The high court also directed the state government to pay complete salary and allowances for the suspension period.

The state government preferred an appeal against the high court orders. As the suspension period exceeded two years, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition filed by the state government. The apex court said that Rao is deemed to have been reinstated in service from the date of completion of two years from the date of his suspension and salary should be paid accordingly.

As the Supreme Court dismissed the petition filed by the state government, the orders passed by the high court are deemed to be in force according to which he should be paid full salary for the entire period of suspension and failing to do so would attract contempt, he argued. The state government on the other hand argued that they have paid salary in accordance with the directions of the Supreme Court.

Considering the arguments on both sides, the high court bench comprising Justice DVSS Somayajulu and Justice S Subba Reddy observed that given the facts and circumstances of the case, they are not satisfied with the argument of the petitioner that the chief secretary wilfully disobeyed the orders of the high court.


Source link