APHC010568742024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD CONTEMPT CASE NO: 4678 OF 2024 Between: 1. ISHWARIYA ORCHARDS AND PLANTATIONS, Rep. by its Managing Partner Mr. Kishan Lal, S/o. Mohan Lal, Aged 65 years, R/o. 12-B, Annanagar Street, Manavala Nagar Tiruvallur Taluk and District, Tamilnadu State. ...Petitioner AND 1. S VENKATESWARA IAS, District Collector, Tirupati Tirupati District. 2. Sri Shubham Bansal IAS, Joint Collector, Tirupati Tirupati District. 3. Kum Kiranmayee, Revenue Divisional Officer, Sullurupet, Tirupati District. 4. Sri T V Subramanyam, Tahsildar, Satyavedu Mandal Satyavedu, Tirupati District. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: V VINOD K REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: J DILEEP KUMAR 2 The Court made the following ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri Ghanta Rama Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri V. Vinod K Reddy, learned Counsel for the Contempt Petitioner and Sri J. Dilip Kumar, learned Counsel for the Respondents. 2. The present Contempt Case is filed complaining non-compliance of the Order of this Court dated 29.08.2024 in W.P.No.9109 of 2024. Sri Ghanta Rama Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Writ Petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to the operative portion of the Order of this Court which is usefully extracted hereunder: “10. In view of the above premise, the Writ Petition stands allowed. Consequently, there shall be a direction to the Respondent Nos.2 to 5 to initiate steps in response to the Representations submitted by the Writ Petitioner dated 25.09.2023 and 06.01.2024 (Ex.P.1 collectively) and take a final decision within a period of six weeks from today and communicate such decision/order to the Writ Petitioner forthwith. Writ Petitioner is directed to submit a copy of this Order to the Respondent Nos.2 to 5 within one week from today. No Order as to Costs.” 3. The above extract would indicate that this Court has directed the Respondents to initiate steps in response to the Representations submitted by the Writ Petitioner dated 25.09.2023 & 06.01.2024 respectively. 4. Sri J. Dilip Kumar, learned Counsel for the Respondents has drawn the attention of this Court to the Order passed by the Tahsildar, Satyavedu, Tirupati District bearing Roc.A/212/2023, dated 15.02.2025. He would submit that subsequent to the Representations dated 25.09.2023 & 06.01.2024, the Contempt Petitioner herein has submitted another Representation on 31.08.2024. The Tahsildar has passed Final Order in response to the said Representation dated 31.08.2024. 5. On perusal of the said Order, it is noticed by this Court that the Tahsildar has also considered the Representations submitted by the Writ Petitioner on 25.09.2023 and 06.01.2024 (in Para No.3 of the said Order). 3 6. Having regard to these aspects, this Court is of the opinion that the Respondents have complied with the Order of this Court, and therefore, would not attract any contempt against the Respondents in view of the Final Order passed by the Tahsildar bearing Roc.A/212/2023, dated 15.02.2025. 7. This Court, therefore, would not look into merits of this Order under the Contempt Jurisdiction. The Contempt Petitioner is at liberty to challenge the Order passed by the Tahsildar dated 15.02.2025, if so advised. 8. With these observations and directions, this Contempt Case is closed. No order as to costs. 9. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 18.09.2025 JKS 4 53 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD CONTEMPT CASE NO: 4678 OF 2024 18.09.2025 JKS