APHC010601762024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 6/2025 Between: 1. G.ANIL KUMAR, S/O G. LAKSHMAIAH, AGED 52 YEARS R/O D. NO. 7412/M3/1, NEW RTC COLONY, 0PP. AUTO NAGAR GATE, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT 1. V MADHUSUDHANA REDDY, THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF NATIONAL CADET CORPS NAGAR, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. C RAJASEKHARA REDDY, THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CADET CORPS (NCC) DIRECTORATE, A.P. STATE WING, SYAMALA NAGAR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT (DELETED). 3. MAJOR K MOHAMMAD ASIF, THE COMMAND ANDHRA BATTALION NATIONAL CADET CORPS (NCC), NFCL ROAD, SIDDARTHA NAGAR, KAKINADA AND 3 ARE DELETED AS PER COURT ORDER DT.07.08.2025. VIDE IA NO.1 OF 2025 IN CC NO.6 OF 2025. 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 respondents/Contemnors herein for his willful violation and deliberate disobedience of the orders passed by this Honble Court in WP No. 16248 of 2024 dated 02.08.2024 under sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and pass IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 6/2025 G.ANIL KUMAR, S/O G. LAKSHMAIAH, AGED 52 YEARS R/O D. NO. 7412/M3/1, NEW RTC COLONY, 0PP. AUTO NAGAR GATE, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND V MADHUSUDHANA REDDY, THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF NATIONAL CADET CORPS (NCC), A.P. STATE WING, SYAMALA NAGAR, GUNTUR DISTRICT C RAJASEKHARA REDDY, THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CADET CORPS (NCC) DIRECTORATE, A.P. STATE WING, SYAMALA NAGAR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT (DELETED). MAJOR K MOHAMMAD ASIF, THE COMMANDING OFFICER, 18, ANDHRA BATTALION NATIONAL CADET CORPS (NCC), NFCL ROAD, SIDDARTHA NAGAR, KAKINADA-533003 (DELETED) RR 2 AND 3 ARE DELETED AS PER COURT ORDER DT.07.08.2025. VIDE IA NO.1 OF 2025 IN CC NO.6 OF 2025. ...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 may be pleased to punish the respondents/Contemnors herein d deliberate disobedience of the orders passed by this Honble Court in WP No. 16248 of 2024 dated 02.08.2024 under sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and pass IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3331] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI G.ANIL KUMAR, S/O G. LAKSHMAIAH, AGED 52 YEARS R/O D. NO. 7412/M3/1, NEW RTC COLONY, 0PP. AUTO NAGAR GATE, ...PETITIONER V MADHUSUDHANA REDDY, THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL (NCC), A.P. STATE WING, SYAMALA C RAJASEKHARA REDDY, THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CADET CORPS (NCC) DIRECTORATE, A.P. STATE WING, SYAMALA NAGAR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT (DELETED). ING OFFICER, 18, ANDHRA BATTALION NATIONAL CADET CORPS (NCC), NFCL 533003 (DELETED) RR 2 AND 3 ARE DELETED AS PER COURT ORDER DT.07.08.2025. ...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 may be pleased to punish the respondents/Contemnors herein d deliberate disobedience of the orders passed by this Honble Court in WP No. 16248 of 2024 dated 02.08.2024 under sections 2 of 3 IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to delete the names of respondent no. 2 and 3 from the cause title in the above contempt case and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SURRATHI PRASAD Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. ARUN SHOWRI G The Court made the following: The above contempt case has been filed complaining of violation of the order dated 02.08.2024 in W.P.No.16248 of 2024. 2. The writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of on 02.08.2024. The operative portion of the order reads as under: “Accordingly this writ petition is allowed at the admission stage. The Order No.NCC (AP)/918/1/759/e/B-1 dated 09.07.2024 issued by respondent No.2 is set aside. The matter is remanded to respondent No.2 to pass a reasoned order keeping in view the order passed in the earlier writ petition W.P.No.15491 of 2021. …” 3. Thereafter, the authority passed a reasoned order vide order No.NCC(AP)/918/1/759/E/B-1 dated 27.09.2024. A copy of the said order has been served to the learned counsel for the petitioner, across the bar, on 07.08.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he informed the petitioner about the order, dated 27.09.2024 passed by the authority. 5. Since a reasoned order has been passed in pursuance of order, dated 02.08.2024, this court doesn’t find any violation of the order dated 02.08.2024. 3 of 3 6. In J.S.Parihar Vs. Ganpat Duggar and Others1, the Hon’ble Apex Court observed as under: “….once there is an order passed by the Government on the basis of the directions issued by the Court, there arises a fresh cause of action to seek redressal in an appropriate forum. The preparation of the seniority list may be wrong or may be right or may or may not be in conformity with the directions. But that would be a fresh cause of action for the aggrieved party to avail of the opportunity of judicial review. But that cannot be considered to be the willful violation of the order. After re-exercising the judicial review in contempt proceedings, afresh direction by the learned Single Judge cannot be given to redraw the seniority list. In other words, the learned Judge was exercising the jurisdiction to consider the matter on merits in the contempt proceedings. It would not be permissible under Section 12 of the Act.” 7. Thus, as seen from the expression of the Hon’ble Apex Court, since a speaking order was passed by proceedings dated 27.09.2024 in compliance with the order in the writ petition, the petitioner, if aggrieved can challenge the said speaking order. 8. Given the above facts and circumstances of the case, since there is no violation of the order, dated 02.08.2024, this contempt case is closed. However, it is open to the petitioner to challenge the order passed by the authority vide order No.NCC(AP)/918/1/759/E/B-1 dated 27.09.2024, if the petitioner is aggrieved. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 22.08.2025 IKN 1 (1996) 6 SCC 291