APHC010448402024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3973/2024 Between: N Sreekanth Prasad ...PETITIONER AND Shasibhusan Kumar and Others ...CONTEMNOR(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GINJUPALLI SUBBA RAO Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. KANAKALA DEVI PRASANNAKUMAR 2. . The Court made the following order: This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of orders dated 28.03.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.33012/2023. 2. Heard Sri G.Subba Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri O.Manohar Reddy, learned Senior counsel for the contemnors/respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that, the Superintending Engineer, Kurnool District, has cancelled the petitioner’s contract vide proceedings dated 01.09.2023, without issuing any notice to the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed a writ petition vide W.P.No.33012 of 2023 which was allowed by this Court by setting aside the impugned proceedings dated 01.09.2023 and further a liberty was also given to the concerned authority to take steps in accordance with law. In spite of the said order, the Government had made subsequent contract with one G.Pullaiah, which is not valid in view of the orders passed by this Court. The respondents herein are willfully flouting and deliberately disobeying the orders of this court and are guilty of contempt of Courts and liable to be punished under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act and accordingly prayed to punish the respondents herein. 4. On the other hand, the learned Senior Counsel for the respondents/contemnors contended that, the contract period with the petitioner is from 20.05.2023 to 31.03.2024. The petitioner’s contract was cancelled vide proceedings dated 01.09.2023 and the petitioner has filed the writ petition on 20.12.2023 wherein this Court has disposed of the same on 28.03.2024 i.e., four days prior to the completion of contract and by virtue of the said reason, the contemnor could not implement the orders of this Court by giving contract to the petitioner once again that too after completion of contract period. He further submitted that the contemnor has utmost respect towards this Court and rendered unconditional apology and prayed to exonerate the contemnor and close the contempt case. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions of both the learned counsel. 6. A perusal of the record would indicate that the contract period of the petitioner is from 20.05.2023 to 31.03.2024, the order impugned in the writ petition is passed on 01.09.2023 and the petitioner has filed the said writ petition on 20.12.2023 wherein this Court has disposed of the same on 28.03.2024 i.e., four days prior to the completion of contract, on the ground that the petitioner was not given any opportunity of personal hearing. This Court is of the opinion that, as rightly contended by the learned Senior Counsel, when the contract period of the petitioner is about to expire, in view of the orders of this Court, the contract could not be given to the petitioner once again. Further, this Court is satisfied with the explanation rendered by the contemnors for not implementing the orders of this Court and as the contemnors have rendered an unconditional apology, this Court would like to exonerate the respondent/contemnor (Superintending Engineer) for the words that are incorporated in the order passed by him. 7. In view of the above, this Contempt case is dismissed, having found that there is no willful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court by the respondents. However, the petitioner is always at liberty to approach appropriate forum for damages, if any, if so advised. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stands closed. ________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 27.03.2025 BRS