APHC010171422021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 972/2021 Between: 1. BANAVATH RAMA DEVI BAI, W/O. KOTA SWAMI NAIK, AGED 32 YEARS, OCC - PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2. KAPPALAKUNTA BALU NAIK, S/O. SOMLA NAIK, AGED OCC - CULTIVATION, RIO. D. NO. 1 THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 3. KAPPALAKUNTA CHINUKU BAI, W/O. BODE NAIK, AGED 58 YEARS, OCC- PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALAC MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. KAPPALAKUNTA BADDI BAI, W/O. DUBLA NAIK, AGED 54 YEARS, OCC - CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1 THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. BANAVATH LAKSHMI BAI, W/O. P 44 YEARS, OCC PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. MUDAVATH LAKSHMI BAI, W/O. THAVU NAIK, AGED 45 YEARS, OCC - CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1 THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 972/2021 BANAVATH RAMA DEVI BAI, W/O. KOTA SWAMI NAIK, AGED 32 - CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1 PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. KAPPALAKUNTA BALU NAIK, S/O. SOMLA NAIK, AGED 35 YEARS, CULTIVATION, RIO. D. NO. 1-17, PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM KAPPALAKUNTA CHINUKU BAI, W/O. BODE NAIK, AGED 58 CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1 PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. KAPPALAKUNTA BADDI BAI, W/O. DUBLA NAIK, AGED 54 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1-18, PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM BANAVATH LAKSHMI BAI, W/O. PEDDA KOTA SWAMI NAIK, AGED 44 YEARS, OCC - CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1 PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. MUDAVATH LAKSHMI BAI, W/O. THAVU NAIK, AGED 45 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1-8, PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BANAVATH RAMA DEVI BAI, W/O. KOTA SWAMI NAIK, AGED 32 CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1-288, PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND 35 YEARS, 17, PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM KAPPALAKUNTA CHINUKU BAI, W/O. BODE NAIK, AGED 58 CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1-19 HERUVU VILLAGE AND KAPPALAKUNTA BADDI BAI, W/O. DUBLA NAIK, AGED 54 YEARS, 18, PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM EDDA KOTA SWAMI NAIK, AGED CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1-28, PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MUDAVATH LAKSHMI BAI, W/O. THAVU NAIK, AGED 45 YEARS, CHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM 2 7. KAPPALAKUNTA BALESWARI BAI, W/O. BADDU NAIK, AGED 33 YEARS, OCC - CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1-13, PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 8. KAPPALAKUNTA RAMILI BAI, W/O. MANGE NAIK, AGED 60, OCC - CULTIVATION, R/O. PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 9. MEGAVATH PEMILIBAI, W/O. JEENTHA NAIK, AGED 48 YEARS, OCC - CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1-87, PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 10. MEGAVATH GOPI NAIK, S/O. VASRAM NAIK, AGED 32 YEARS, OCC - CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1-89, PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 11. MEGAVATH NAGESWARA RAO NAIK,, S/O. VASRAM NAIK, AGED 29 YEARS, OCC - CULTIVATION, R/O. D. NO. 1-86, PULLALACHERUVU THANDA, PULLALACHERUVU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. SRI ASHOK REDDY, S/o. Not Known, aged about aged 37 years, Working as Tahsildar, Pullalacheruvu Mandal, Prakasam 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 pleased to punish the respondent for his willful disobedience of Order Dt. 20.09.2019 passed in W.P No. 14177 of 2019 on the file of this Hon'ble Court and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI Counsel for the Contemnor: 1. P SUBASH 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 respondent for willful disobedience of the order dated 20.09.2019 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.14177 of 2019. 2. Heard Smt Nimmagadda Revathi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri P.Subhash, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, contended that this Court vide order dated 20.09.2019 directed the respondent to examine the representation made by the petitioners dated 03.11.2018 and take appropriate action, in accordance with law, after giving notice and opportunity to all the concerned persons, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. She further contended that the said order was duly communicated to the respondent by way of legal notice dated 30.10.2019. The respondent received the same, but did not comply with the order of this Court. The petitioners personally approached the respondent with a request to implement the said order, but in vain. It amounts to willful and deliberate disobedience of the orders of this Court. Hence, he is liable to be punished under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. 4. In reply, learned counsel for respondent, while reiterating the contents of the counter affidavit, contended that pursuant to the directions of this Court, notices were issued to all the petitioners calling for their appearance before 4 the Tahsildar on 13.11.2019 with all connected records for enquiry to prove their title over the subject land. All the petitioners have attended before the Tahsildar on the date of enquiry, but they have not produced original pass books and title deeds or any other records to show that they have submitted applications before the forest authorities for issuance of ‘Individual Certificate of Rights’. The Then Tahsildar conducted enquiries and submitted a detailed report to the Revenue Divisional officer, Markapur brining out new facts that during inspection, it was noticed that the lands assigned to the petitioners also fell in the limits of Reserve Forest and the erstwhile Tahsildar has issued land allotment pattas to them without physical verification of land. But the field sketches for the survey numbers mentioned in the land allotted pattas to the petitioners are not available in Tahsildar’s office. He further submitted that when the Writ Petitioners approached the present Tahsildar, he furnished a copy of the report of his immediate predecessor Tahsildar to the Writ Petitioners. Further, all the Writ Petitioners were communicated with an endorsement vide Rc.A/70/2021 dated 29.04.2021 intimating them that it was not possible to consider their request for making online entries. Thus, there was no willful disobedience in complying the orders of this Court. He further submits that if the petitioners have any grievance regarding the said endorsement, they may approach appropriate forum for redressal of their grievance. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the Contempt Case. 5. To the said submission, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the application of the petitioners was rejected without any justification and 5 without proper reasons. The said order was passed not within the time stipulated by this Court. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent admits that there is some delay in complying the orders of this Court. He submits that the said delay is neither willful nor wanton, but is due to various administrative reasons beyond control. 7. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel. 8. This Court vide order dated 20.09.2019 disposed of the Writ Petition No.14177 of 2019. The operative portion of the said order is as follows: “As the pattadar pass books and adangal show the names of the petitioners, and as they filed representation dated 03.11.2018 to respondent No.4, respondent No.4 is directed to examine the representation made by the petitioners and take appropriate action, in accordance with law, after giving notice and opportunity to all the concerned persons, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.” 9. It is not in dispute that the Tahsildar issued Endorsement vide R.C.A/70/2021 dated 29.04.2021 intimating that it is not possible to enter the subject land in web land adangal and the petitioners are informed to apply for ROFR pattas, as the subject land belongs to Forest Department. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the said order has not been passed in true spirit and the authority has rejected the petitioners’ 6 application without assigning any reasons. Since the scope of contempt jurisdiction is summary in nature and contempt proceedings are not intended to resolve factual disputes or determine the rights of parties, this Court, under the Contempt of Courts Act, shall only adjudicate whether there is willful disobedience of any judgment or order passed by the Court. Insofar as the delay is concerned, it is an admitted fact that there has been some delay in complying with the orders of this Court, however, the respondent has explained the said delay satisfactorily. 10. In view of the above, since the respondent has issued endorsement on the application of the petitioners and also explained the delay satisfactorily, this Court is satisfied that the order of this Court has been complied with and there remains nothing for adjudication. Hence, the Contempt Case is liable to be closed. 11. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to question the Endorsement vide R.C.A/70/2021 dated 29.04.2021 issued by the respondent before appropriate forum in accordance with law. 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 10.07.2025 MP 7 204 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO:972 of 2021 Date: 10.07.2025 MP