APHC010119512022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 827/2022 Between: 1. MUPPALA LAKSHMAIAH, SC FIELD LABOUR COOPERATIVE SOCIETY, REG. NO. G3167, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MUPPALLA SHIVAJI S/O NAGARATNAM, AGED 38 YEARS, R/O KOTHAPETA, HAMLET OF GANIATHKURU VILLAGE, KANCHIKACHARLA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2. MUPPALLA SHIVAJI,, S/O NAGARATNAM, AGED 38 YEARS, R/O KOTHAPETA, HAMLET OF GANIATHKURU VILLAGE, KANCHIKACHARLA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. J NIVAS I A S, The District Collector, Krishna District. ...CONTEMNOR Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may be pleased to Hon'ble Court may please to punish the respondent herein under the provisions of contempt of courts Act for willfully violation of the orders of this for not implementing the orders of this Hon'ble Court in WP. No. 14001 of 2019 dated 19/09/2019 by Hon'ble Justice Sri Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased please to direct the respondent to submit a report on steps taken for implementing the orders of the court WP. No. 14001 of 2019 dated 19/09/2019 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. PONNADA SREE VYAS Counsel for the Contemnor: 1. G L NAGESWAR RAO The Court made the following: ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for the willful disobedience of the orders dated 19.09.2019 passed in W.P.No.14001 of 2019. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court while disposing the writ petition directed the respondents to consider the case of petitioner society basing on the letter addressed by the Tahsildar to the District Collector to take appropriate decision in accordance with law and communicate the same to the petitioner. Now, respondents had passed orders with certain delay which amounts to deliberate disobedience of the orders of this Court and further the order passed is also not in true spirit, as such, they are liable for punishment under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that there is no willful disobedience on the part of the respondents as alleged by the petitioner. In fact, the District Collector passed orders on the petitioner’s representation by duly taking the letter addressed by the Tahsildar into consideration and if at all the petitioner has any grievance, he has to question the same before appropriate forum but cannot ventilate the same under contempt of Courts Act. He further submitted that the respondents have filed their counter duly explaining the delay and the same is neither willful nor wanton, as such, prayed to close the contempt. 4. Perused the record and considered the submissions of both the learned counsel. 5. This Court disposed writ petition under its order dated 19.09.2019, which reads as follows: “In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the case, with regard to entitlement of petitioner’s society for the subject land, as the Tahsildar has already addressed letter dated 03.07.2019 to the District Collector, respondent No.2 is directed to take appropriate decision on the same, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, and communicate the same to the petitioners herein.” 6. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the orders passed by the District Collector are not in true spirit and with certain delay, which amounts to deliberate disobedience of the orders of this Court. The submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents is that the District Collector has passed orders by duly taking into consideration the letter addressed by Tahsildar and further the counter explains the reasons for delay in passing the orders. A perusal of the order passed by this Court dated 19.09.2019 would indicate that the Tahsildar has already addressed a letter dated 03.07.2019 to the District Collector to take a decision on the petitioners case, accordingly, in obedience of the orders of the Court, the Collector passed orders. No doubt there is certain delay but the same has been explained satisfactorily, as such, there is no deliberate disobedience on the part of the respondents as alleged by the petitioner and the contempt case is liable to be closed. 7. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to question the order passed by the District Collector before appropriate forum in accordance with law, if so advised. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 10th July, 2025 RKS