HC pulls up senior IAS officer for not attending hearing

Hyderabad: Principal secretary of the secondary education department, Yogita Rana, came under fire from the Telangana high court on Thursday for failing to appear in person in a contempt case despite a clear order directing her to do so.The contempt case was filed over the non-implementation of a 2023 high court order relating to a compassionate appointment in the department.When the senior IAS officer failed to appear before the court when the matter came up for hearing in the morning, her counsel sought exemption, citing official reasons. Taking serious note of her absence, Justice T Madhavi Devi sought an explanation.Later, after being warned that an arrest warrant could be issued, the official appeared virtually after lunch and tendered an unconditional apology.

The court accepted her apology and granted her three weeks to comply with its orders.“The contemnor appeared virtually and has tendered an unconditional apology and requested time to file counter,” the judge recorded while posting the matter for hearing after three weeks.Before accepting the apology, the judge questioned the officer on how she could be unaware of the court’s orders and warned that any repetition would invite action under the Contempt of Courts Act.

Earlier in the day, the judge observed that once the court directs a person to appear, compliance is mandatory. She noted that Rana had neither appeared before the court nor filed an application explaining her absence.“This is a clear contempt of court. Despite notice through the high court, and the civil court, she does not appear before the court, and takes the notices very lightly,” the judge remarked.When the counsels informed the court that the officer’s absence on Thursday was due to a communication lapse within the department, the judge said, “Court will take action against her. Let her take action against her subordinates who are responsible for miscommunication.”The judge also refused to accept an apology from the counsel, observing that the lapse was not the lawyer’s fault.“This is the respect she has for the court. This is insolence. I do not want to hear sorry from the counsel,” the judge said.