IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO CONTEMPT CA.qp NO: 2738 OF 2024 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 the respondents herein before this Honble Court and punish them for willfully and deliberately disobeying the orders passed by this Hon’ble Court in W. P. No. 13492 of 2020 dated 22- 07- 2022. Between: Bhimavarapu Babu Rao, S/o. Late B. Adinarayana, aged about 62 years, R/o. D. No. 6-4-11, Nayee Vari Street, 10“^ Ward, Bhimavaram-I, West Godavari District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. Sri S. Satyanarayana, - Occ: Commissioner, Endowments Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Gollapudi, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 2. Sri B.L. Nagesh, Occ; Assistant Commissioner and Executive Officer, Sri Mavullamma Amma Vari Devastanam, Bhimavaram Town, West Godavari District. ...CONTEMNORS •> ir Counsel for the Petitioner : SR| kAVITHA GOTTIPATI Counsel for the Respondent No. i: SRI B S SHIVAJI Counsel for the Respondent No. 2 : SRI V V SUBBAIAH The Court made the following ORDER ■ APHC010256402C24 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Originsl Jurisdiction) [3310] 0? FRIDAY THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO CONTEMPT CA«=;F NO: 2738/2024 Between: ...PETITIONER Bhimavarapu Babu Rao AND ...CONTEMNOR(S) Sri S Satyanarayana and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KAVITHA GOTTI PATI Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1.VENKATASUBBAIAH V 2.BSSHIVAJI The Court made the following: ORDER: This Contempt case has been filed to punish the contemnors/respondents under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 for violation of the orders and for not implementing the orders of this Court in W.P.No. 13492 of 2020 dated 22.07.2022. s 2. Heard Smt. G. Kavitha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri B.S. Shivaji, and Sri V.V. Subbaiah, learned counsels appearing for the respondents. 3. This Court, vide order, dated 22.07.2022, in W.P.No.13492 of 2020, has disposed of the writ petition. The operative portion of the same, as under: “...Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned proceedings N0.AI/1070068/2018 dated 07.1.2020 issued by the 2^ respondent dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of dismissal vide proceedings in Rc.No.A1/11/2017 and A1/132/2017, dated 11.7.2018 issued by the 3"^ respondent. Further, the respondents herein directed to reinstate the petitioner into service. Further, the respondents are directed to conduct fresh enquiry and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law..” are 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of the non- compliance of the above orders, earlier the petitioner filed CC No.4852 of 2022 before this Court and during pendency of the said Contempt Case, the 3 respondent issued proceedings vide Rc.No. 132/2017 dated 1.3.2023stating that the petitioner is not entitled to reinstatement into service as the petitioner has already crossed the age of superannuation i.e., 30.6.2022 as prescribed under Rule-9 of Service Rules under G.O.Ms.no.888, dated 8.12.2000.. rd 5. Learned counsel further submits that, in pursuant to the petitioner’s age of superannuation as on 30.06.2022 this Hon’ble Court was pleased to qlose the above CC. during the interregnum period, the respondents No.2 and 3 in the writ petition have filed W.A No.937 of 2022 and W.A No.239 of 2023 before Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court and the said appeals were disposed of as infructuous on 30.11.2023 on the ground that in pursuant to the orders of learned Single Judge, the respondents/appellants in the Writ Appeal holds a fresh enquiry and a report also has been submitted by the enquiry officer on 17.6.2023 and a second show cause notice also has been issued to the petitioner in pursuant to thesaid enquiry report. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted his explanation. However, the 2'"'^ respondent has not passed any final orders till now. Therefore, learned counsel requests this Court to pass appropriate orders. 6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the 1®* respondent submits that, the respondent has filed counter affidavit denying the averments made in the petition. As per counter, he submits that, with due obedience to the above orders of the Hon'ble Court, the then Commissioner, Endowmentshas issued directions to the Executive Officer of 2"*^ respondent-temple herein i.e.. Sri Mavullamma Ammavari Devasthanam, Bhimavaram vide Memo in Rc.No.A2/11025(48)/7/2022, Dt.01.03.2023 to initiate steps for conducting enquiry afresh against the writ petitioner by duly following the procedure prescribed under the Rules and submit compliance report. 2'''‘respondent herein has passed final orders, duly conducting fresh enquiry, vide Later, the proceedings in Rc.No.A1/132/2017, dated 21.06.2024 imposing the punishment of dismissal from service, as the petitioner has produced false and forged educational certificate constituting grave misconduct. The same was communicated to the petitioner through registered post on 11.07.2024. Thus, the orders of the Hon'ble High Court are complied with. 7. Learned counsel for the 1®‘ respondent further submits that the present C.C.No.2738 of 2024 is not maintainable, more particularly in view of orders passed in earlier C.C.No.4852 of 2022 closing the same as there is no contempt made out. Absolutely there are no changed circumstances constituting fresh contempt in pursuance of order in W.P.No. 13492 of 2020, Dt.22.07.2022, apart from the above facts, the present contempt case isnot maintainable on the ground of limitation as such the contempt case is liable to be dismissed. 8. In view of the submissions made by both the learned counsels, this Court observed that, as the earlier Contempt case vide CC No4852 of 2022 filed by the petitioner has already been closed by this court, and as already stated by the learned counsel that as there are no changed circumstances constituting fresh contempt case in pursuance of the order in WP No. 13492 of 2020, the petitioner has to challenge the proceedings in Rc.No.A1/132/2017 , dated 21.06.2024 issued by the 2'’'* respondent afresh. Therefore, nothing survives in the present contempt case and the same is liable to be closed 9. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. SD/- K.TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. Sri S. Satyanarayana, Occ: Commissioner, Endowments Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Gollapudi, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 2. Sri B.L. Nagesh, Occ: Assistant Commissioner and Executive Officer, Sri Mavuilamma Amma Vari Devastanam, Bhimavaram Town. West Godavari District. One CC to Sri. Kavitha Gottipati, Advocate. [OPUC] One CC to Sri. B S Shivaji, Advocate. [OPUC] One CC to Sri. VVSubbaiah, Advocate. [OPUC] THREE CD COPIES. LRV TAC 3. 4. 5. 6. HIGH COURT DATED:07/03/2025 ORDER CC.No.2738 of 2024 OV APR 2025 i ^ . Curreni section CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE