Supreme Court Grants Bail to Man After One Year in Jail, Bars Social Media Contact with Complainant Supreme Court Grants Bail to Teen, Emphasizes Consensual Relationship in POCSO Case Involving 16-Year-Old Once Decided, Forever Closed: Himachal Pradesh High Court Bars Appeal Citing Res Judicata Supreme Court Halts Trial, Calls Continuing Proceedings a "Travesty of Justice" in ₹50 Crore Corruption Case A Married Woman's Consensual Relationship Does Not Attract Section 376 IPC in Absence of False Promise: Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail to Lawyer Mere Possession of Proceeds of Crime Sufficient for Money Laundering Charges: Madras High Court Upholds Money Laundering Case Against Former Trustee of All India Overseas Bank Employees Union Age Is Not a Measure of Competence - But Public Safety Prevails: Calcutta High Court Upholds Age Restrictions for Electrical Supervisor Certification Landlord Cannot Claim Eviction Without Proving Genuine Need: Bombay High Court Overturns Eviction Decree Future Prospects Must Be Considered for Deceased Below 40 Years with a Permanent Job: Andhra Pradesh High Court Enhances Compensation NDPS | Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Granted When Accused Have Absconded and Failed to Cooperate in Investigation: Delhi High Court Continuing Prosecution in Light of Genuine Compromise Would Not Serve Justice:  Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes FIR for Attempt to Murder Allahabad High Court Denies Bail, Cites Lack of Extradition Treaty with China: ‘High Flight Risk’ in Fraud Case Custodial Interrogation Necessary for Effective Investigation: Anticipatory Bail Denied by Punjab & Haryana High Court in ₹1.19 Crore Cheating Case

Andhra Pradesh High Court Fines APSRTC Official for Non-compliance in Apprentice Recruitment Case

07 October 2024 7:10 PM

By: sayum


Court’s Orders on Awarding Marks Must be Followed Strictly: Failure to Comply Will Invite Punishment. Andhra Pradesh High Court in C.S. Mahesh Babu & Others v. Sri M.T. Krishna Babu & Others (Contempt Case No. 1141 of 2020) ruled that the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) had willfully violated the Court’s order regarding awarding marks for recruitment. The Court imposed a fine on the second respondent, the Regional Manager of APSRTC, for failing to comply with the earlier directions.

The case involved petitioners who had completed apprenticeships with APSRTC and applied for posts of Shramik under a 2010 recruitment notification. The recruitment process gave weightage to candidates with a National Apprenticeship Certificate, but the petitioners had only a National Trade Certificate. When their applications were rejected, the petitioners approached the High Court in 2012, which directed APSRTC to award marks based on their National Trade Certificates. APSRTC did not comply with this order, leading the petitioners to file contempt cases in 2020.

The core issue was whether APSRTC had violated the Court’s order by not awarding marks to the petitioners based on their National Trade Certificates.

APSRTC contended that the National Apprenticeship Certificate, not the National Trade Certificate, was required for awarding marks. They also argued that even if 30 marks were awarded, the petitioners would not reach the cutoff for appointment. Furthermore, all vacancies had already been filled, and reopening the process would be impossible.

However, the High Court rejected these arguments, stating that its previous order was clear: marks had to be awarded based on the National Trade Certificates, and APSRTC could not arbitrarily deny them. The Court also criticized APSRTC’s claim that awarding 30 marks would not suffice, calling it “specious reasoning,” as the maximum possible score remained 100.

Justice R. Raghunandan Rao ruled that APSRTC’s failure to comply with the Court’s previous order amounted to contempt. While noting that the second respondent had recently undergone medical treatment, the Court imposed a fine of ₹2,000, with the condition that failure to pay would result in two weeks of simple imprisonment.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court held APSRTC in contempt for non-compliance with its earlier order on apprentice recruitment and fined the responsible official. The judgment reaffirmed the Court’s authority in ensuring that its orders are followed without arbitrary reinterpretation by the parties involved.

Date of Decision: October 4, 2024

C.S. Mahesh Babu & Others v. Sri M.T. Krishna Babu & Others

Similar News