APHC010343702025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1828/2025 Between: 1. N. VIJAY KUMAR,, S/O. LATE RAJA RAO, AGED 70 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED REGIONAL JOINT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 103, N.R. TOWERS, YELLAREDDYGUDA, AMEERPET, HYDERABAD - 500 073 ...PETITIONER AND 1. V VINAY CHAND IAS, Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Department, Secretariat, Velgapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur 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 may be pleased to punish the respondent under Sections 10 to 12 of The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for willful violation and disobedience of the orders of this Honble Court passed in W.P No. 25657 of 2023 dated 03.10.2023 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. D V SASIDHAR Counsel for the Contemnor: 1. 2 The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1828/2025 ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the order dated 03.10.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.25657 of 2023. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is observed that admittedly, this Court passed an order on 03.10.2023 and the copy of the said order was dispatched by this Court on 29.11.2023. Furthermore, the petitioner submitted a representation on 27.11.2023 seeking implementation of the order of this Court. Therefore, any violation or disobedience on part of the respondents shall be adjudicated only within a period of one (01) year from the date of the alleged violation as per the Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Admittedly, in the instant case the alleged violation occurred on 12.01.2024. But here the petitioner has filed the present Contempt Case under Sections 10 & 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short “the Act”). 4. For more understanding Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is extracted hereunder: 20. Limitation for actions for contempt.— 4 No court shall initiate any proceedings of contempt, either on its own motion or otherwise, after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed. 5. On perusal of the Section 20 of the Act, 1971, as extracted above, it is made clear that any Contempt Case alleging the disobedience or violation of the orders of this Court should be challenged within a period of one (01) year from the date of the alleged act of contempt committed by the respondents. But, in the instant case, the Contempt Case has been filed after a lapse of 1½ year, which is not in terms of Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. As such, the institution of this Contempt Case is contrary to the object and scheme of the Act, 1971. Hence, the present Contempt Case is barred and contrary to law. 6. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the respondents that the present Contempt Case is not maintainable is valid and sustainable, hence, this case is liable to be closed. 7. In view of the reasons stated above, the present Contempt Case is closed as not maintainable. No costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 22.07.2025 SSCCHH 5 152 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Contempt Case No.1828 of 2025 22.07.2025 SSCCHH