APHC010064632025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 439/2025 Between: 1. VARIKUTI SIDDAIAH,, S/O.NAGABHUSHANAM, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O.MYSURUVARIPALLY VILLAGE, SURAPURAJUVPALLY POST, KODURU MANDAL, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. SRIDHAR CHAMAKURI, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, RAYACHOTI. 2. S MAHABOOB CHAND, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, TAHSILDAR, RAILWAYKODURU MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. ...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 pleased to punish the respondent herein under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for deliberately disobeying the order of this Hon'ble Court passed in W.P.No.24351 of 2024 dated 25.10.2024 by not obeying the same and for his conduct in bringing down the dignity and majesty of this Hon'ble Court Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M K RAJ KUMAR Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 2 1. Y BALAJI 3 The Court made the following ORAL ORDER: Heard both counsels. 2. It transpires from the record that vide Order dated 25.10.2024 in W.P.No.24351 of 2024, this Court had directed the Respondents to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s application dated 07.08.2024, for granting DKT patta, in accordance with law, within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Even though, this Court had directed the Respondents to consider the Application of the Petitioner and pass a Speaking Order within a period of two months, the respondents are not complied with the order of this court, except issuing notice to the petitioner dated 06.03.2025. Hence, the petitioner approached this Court by filing this Contempt Case. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents had filed counter-affidavit by stating that after issuance of notice to the petitioner on 06.03.2025, and after hearing the petitioner and after perusal of the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 10.03.2025, the Tahsildar (Respondent No.2) had passed a detailed speaking order on 29.04.2025 by rejecting the claim of the petitioner, as such, the orders of this Hon’ble Court are duly complied with by passing the detailed speaking order. 4. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the respondents, this Court opines that since the orders of this Court dated 25.10.2024 in W.P.No.24351 of 2024 are duly complied by the respondent No.2 by passing a speaking order dated 29.04.2025, no further orders are required in this contempt case. 5. Accordingly, this Contempt Case is closed. No order as to costs. 4 6. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Date: 19.06.2026 MNR 5 266 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE No.439 OF 2025 Dt: 19.06.2026 Mnr