7APHC010140682024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: Between: 1. SMT. T. RENUKA, W/O T. HARIKRISHNA, HINDU, AGED 46 YEARS, R/O KRISHNAJIMMAPURAM VILLAGE, 197 RAMAPURAM POST, GUDIPALA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 1. SRI SHAN MOHAN SAGILI IAS, SRI SHAN MOHAN SAGILI, NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT MAJOR, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR. 2. SRI BABU RAJENDRA PRASAD, THE TAHSILDAR, GUDIPALA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. SRI K SATYANARAYANA, M/S. MONTECARLO LIMITED, REP. BY ITS CHIEF PROJECT MANAGER (CPM), SINDUBHAVAN ROAD, BODAKDEV, AHAMADBAD OFFICE AT 35 P2 PLUS2J,PASUMANDA VILLAGE, NARAHARIPET POST, GUDIPALA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 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 summon and punish the respondent herein under Sec. 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Court Act, the orders of this Hon'ble Court dt.10.11.2023 passed in W.P. No. 29471 of 2023 and to pass IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1943/2024 SMT. T. RENUKA, W/O T. HARIKRISHNA, HINDU, AGED 46 YEARS, R/O KRISHNAJIMMAPURAM VILLAGE, 197 RAMAPURAM POST, GUDIPALA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT -517403. ...PETITIONER AND SRI SHAN MOHAN SAGILI IAS, SRI SHAN MOHAN SAGILI, NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT MAJOR, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR. SRI BABU RAJENDRA PRASAD, THE TAHSILDAR, GUDIPALA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. SRI K SATYANARAYANA, M/S. MONTECARLO LIMITED, REP. BY TS CHIEF PROJECT MANAGER (CPM), SINDUBHAVAN ROAD, BODAKDEV, AHAMADBAD - 380058, GUJARATH STATE, CAMP OFFICE AT 35 P2 PLUS2J,PASUMANDA VILLAGE, NARAHARIPET POST, GUDIPALA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517 132. ...CONTEMNOR(S): 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 summon and punish the respondent herein under Sec. 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 for his willful disobedience and violation of the orders of this Hon'ble Court dt.10.11.2023 passed in W.P. No. 29471 of IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI SMT. T. RENUKA, W/O T. HARIKRISHNA, HINDU, AGED 46 YEARS, R/O KRISHNAJIMMAPURAM VILLAGE, 197 RAMAPURAM POST, ...PETITIONER SRI SHAN MOHAN SAGILI IAS, SRI SHAN MOHAN SAGILI, IAS, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT MAJOR, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR. SRI BABU RAJENDRA PRASAD, THE TAHSILDAR, GUDIPALA SRI K SATYANARAYANA, M/S. MONTECARLO LIMITED, REP. BY TS CHIEF PROJECT MANAGER (CPM), SINDUBHAVAN ROAD, 380058, GUJARATH STATE, CAMP OFFICE AT 35 P2 PLUS2J,PASUMANDA VILLAGE, NARAHARIPET 517 132. ...CONTEMNOR(S): 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 summon and punish the respondent herein under Sec. 10 to 12 1971 for his willful disobedience and violation of the orders of this Hon'ble Court dt.10.11.2023 passed in W.P. No. 29471 of 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A CHANDRAIH NAIDU Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. SUSHMA YAGANTI 2. N JEEVAN KUMAR 3 The Court made the following order: This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the respondents for willful disobedience of the order dated 10.11.2023 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.29471 of 2023. 2. Heard Sri A.Chandraiah Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt Sushma Yaganti, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Sri N.Jeevan Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.3. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, contended that this Court, vide order dated 10.11.2023, directed the respondent authorities not to interfere with the petitioner’s subject property. He further contended that the respondent authorities are willfully and deliberately violated the orders of this Court. Hence, the respondents are liable to be punished under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. 4. In reply, learned counsel for respondents, while reiterating the contents of their respective counter affidavits, collectively contended that respondent No.3 is not laying any road in the subject lands of the petitioner and the location where permission accorded for mining temporary earth is located in Bandarlaplli village and the contractors of respondent No.3 are reaching the location via Government lands located in block No.55 of Bandarlapalli and said conveyance track is 450 meters away from the subject lands. They further submit that there is neither mining operations of earth metal nor any interference by the respondents in the subject lands. Hence, there is no 4 violation or willful disobedience on the part of the respondents in failing to comply with the order passed by this Court. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the Contempt Case. 5. No material is placed on record to satisfy that the respondents are interfering with the subject property in contradiction of the order passed by this Court. The pleadings are vague and there is no specific allegation as to when the respondents allegedly interfered with the subject property. 6. Taking into consideration the contents of the counter affidavits, since the respondent authorities have not interfered with the petitioner’s subject lands, there remains nothing for adjudication. Hence, the Contempt Case is liable to be closed. 7. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any in the Contempt Case, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 04.09.2025 MP 416 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO:1943 of 2024 Date: 04.09.2025 MP