IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CONTEMPT APPEAL No’s: 4 & 5 OF 2015 CONTEMPT APPEAL NO: 4 OF 2015 Appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, against the order dated 27.03.2015 passed by the Learned single Judge in C.C. No. 2233 of 2013. Between: Tata Mohan Rao, Son of Sri Nagaiah, Aged 37 years. Designation: Tahsildar, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District, Resident of Shyamala Nagar, 1®* Lane, Guntur, Guntur District, A.P. ...APPELLANT (RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT No.2) AND 1. S. Venkateswarlu, Son of Rosaiah, Aged about 56 years, R/o. Adavitakkellapadu Village, Near Summerpeta, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District. 2. Avulamanda Narasimha Rao, S/o. Malakondaiah, Aged about 52 years, R/o. Adavitakkellapadu Village, Near Summerpeta, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District. 3. P. Easwar Rao, S/o. Pakuraiah, Aged about 33 years, R/o. Adavitakkellapadu Village, Near Summerpeta, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District. 4. B. Ramakrishna, S/o. Venkateswarlu, Aged about 45 years, R/o. Adavitakkellapadu Village, Near Summerpeta, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District. ...RESPONDENTS (PETITIONERS / WRIT PETITIONERS) I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(APPL. NO: 399 OF 2015^ 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 to suspend the operation of the Order made in CC.No.2233 of 2013, dated 27.03.2015 pending disposal of the above Contempt Appeal Counsel for the Appellant: SRI KIRTHI TEJA KONDAVEETI Counsel for the Respondents: SMT. T V SRI DEVI CONTEMPT APPEAL NO: 5 OF 2015 Appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, against the order dated 27.03.2015 passed by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy made in C.C. No. 128 of 2014. Between: Tata Mohan Rao, Son of Sri Nagaiah, Aged 37 years. Designation; Tahsildar, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District, Resident of Shyamala Nagar, 1st Lane, Guntur, Guntur District, A.P. ...APPELLANT (RESPONDENT No.1 / RESPONDENT No.3) AND 1. The Guntur Town Mobile Laundry Union, Guntur, rep.by President, Merampalli Bala Lingayya, S/o M. Venkatayya, Aged 58 years, Hindu, R/o Adavitakkellapadu village, Summerpeta, Rajaka Colony, JKC College Road, Guntur, Guntur district. ...RESPONDENT (PETITIONER / WRIT PETITIONER) 2. Gopikrishna, Occ: Revenue Inspector, Guntur Mandal, Guntur district. 3. Prabhakara Rao, Occ: Village Revenue Officer, Adavitakkellapadu Village Guntur Mandal, Guntur district. 4. Kancharla Manikya Rao, Aged 62 years, Occ: business, R/O Srinagar, 5th line, Amaravathi Road, Guntur, Guntur district. ...RESPONDENTS (RESPONDENTS 2 to 4 / RESPONDENTS 4 to 6) I-A. NO: 1 OF 2015rAPPL. NO: 401 OF 2015) 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 to suspend the operation of the Order made in CC.No.128 of 2014 dated 27.03.2015 pending disposal of the above Contempt Appeal Counsel for the Appellant: SRI KIRTHI TEJA KONDAVEETI Counsel for the Respondents: SMT. T V SRI DEVI The Court made the following: COMMON JUDGMENT 1 RRR, J & MRK, J C.A.No.4 & 5/2015 APHC010007182015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3508] 'r/EDME^DAy . THE kIiMETEFMtM DAY OF TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CONTEMPT APPEAL NOs: 4 & 5 of 2015 C.A.No.4/2015 Between: Tata Mohan Rao, ...APPLICANT AND S Venkateswarlu and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Applicant: 1.KIRTHI TEJA KONDAVEETI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.T VSRI DEVI CONTEMPT APPEAL NO: 5/2015 Between: Tata Mohan Rao ...APPLICANT AND The Guntur Town Mobile Laundry Union and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Applicant: 1.KIRTHI TEJA KONDAVEETI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.T VSRI DEVI 2 RRR, J & MRK, C.A.No.4 & 5/2015 ' The Court made the following Common Judgment: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard Sri Kirthi Teja Kondaveeti, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Smt. T.V. Sri Devi learned counsel appearing for respondents. As both these contempt appeals arise out of the common order 2. dated 27.03.2015, of a learned Single Judge of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh in C.C.Nos.2233 of 2013 and 128 of 2014, they are being disposed of by way of this common judgment. 3. Four persons, claiming to be in possession of certain land in D.No.600/1, of Addavitakkellapadu Village, Near Summerpeta, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District, had filed representations before the Revenue Authorities, for grant of house site pattas for the lands, which are said to be in their occupation. Thereafter, these persons had approached the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, by way of W.P.No.23641 of 2013, contending that the revenue authorities were seeking to evict them from the plots in their occupation without considering the representations given by them for grant of house site pattas. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, submitted that the said lands had earlier been assigned to third parties for agricultural purposes, and subsequently, the said assignments had been cancelled, in the year 2005, after which the lands remained vacant. 4. 3 RRR, J & MRK, J C.A.No.4 & 5/2015 Recording the said submissions, a learned Single Judge of the 5. erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh disposed of the writ petition, by order dated 13.09.2013, directing the Tahsildar to consider the petitioners’ application for grant of house site subject to their eligibility and to communicate the decision taken in this regard, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the order. The learned single judge further directed that none of the respondents, including the Tahsildar shall disturb the possession of the petitioners, if they are in possession of the lands. Another set of people through the Guntur Town Mobile Laundry 6. Union, Guntur, approached the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh by way of W.P.No.35958 of 2013 contending that they were in possession of various pieces of land in D.No.600/1 of Addavitakkellapadu Village, Near Summerpeta, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District, since two years and they were sought to be removed from the land without considering their representations for grant of house sites. In this writ petition, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions submitted that the possession of the members of the petitioner- union were not being interfered by the O'"* respondent but some unauthorized structures raised by some persons were removed by the 3'^'^ respondent- Tahsildar in the presence of media. A learned Single Judge of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, by order dated 11.12.2013, after observing that the 3'^^ respondent- 7. 8. ) 4 RRR, J & MRK, J#\ C.A.N0.4& 5/2015 ^ Tahsildar cannot take law into his own hands by indulging in forcible removal of the structures, had disposed of the writ petition stating that the members of the petitioner-union are restrained from raising any structures, till their representations for grant of house site pattas is considered and also directed the 3'^'^ respondent-Tahsildar to restrain himself from repeating such acts in future. 9. The petitioners in both these cases moved the learned Single Judge by way of C.C.No.2233 of 2013 in W.P.No.23641 of 2013 and C.C.No.128 of 2014 in W.P.No.35958 of 2013. In both the cases, the contention of the respondents was that the Tahsildar, despite notice of the orders of the Court, dated 13.12.2013 and 11.12.2013, passed in both the above writ petitions, forcibly removed the huts of the respondents on 06.12.2013 and on 08.01.2014. The respondents contended that such action amounts to deliberate violation of the orders of the Court. 10. The learned Single Judge of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, after considering the submissions made on both sides and after noticing that 88 police personnel were brought to the site, on 08.01.2014, at the specific request of the Tahsildar, had held that the Tahsildar had acted in deliberate and utter disobedience of the orders of the Hon’ble Court and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-. 5 RRR, J & MRK, J C.A.No.4 & 5/2015 11. Aggrieved by this order, passed in the above two contempt cases, on 27.03.2015, the appellant has filed the present two contempt appeals. 12. Sri Kirthi Teja Kondaveeti, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the appellant had not violated the orders of this Court. He would submit that the appellant had only sought to remove the encroachments and the structures being put by the third parties overnight, on the site in question. He would submit that the orders of the Court restrained the appellant-Tahsildar from dispossessing the petitioners in W.P.No.23641 of 2013 and the members of the petitioners-union in W.P.No.35958 of 2013. He would submit that the structures, which were removed from the site, were belonging to third parties, who were not the petitioners in W.P.No.23641 of 2013 or members of the petitioners’-union in W.P.No.35958 of 2013. He would submit that in such circumstances, there is no violation of the directions of this Court and the learned Single Judge could not have convicted the appellant on this ground. 13. The appellant, while raising this ground, has not given any details, of the persons who are said to have entered into the property and who had set up the structures overnight. Lack of such details, reduce the credibility attached to such a stand. It is too much to say that the writ petitioners, had approached 'the High Court for protection of their possession and had i 6 RRR, J & MRK, J ^ C.A.N0.4& 5/2015 " mysteriously vacated the site leaving it open to the third parties to enter into the site. Even if the stand of the appellant is to be accepted, the fact 14. remains that the learned Single Judge, in the orders dated 11.12.2013 in W.P.No.35958 of 2013 had specifically deprecated the action of the appellant Tahsildar, in demolishing the structures, without following the procedure established by law and had directed him not to repeat such acts. It may also be noted that the contempt case came to be filed, in both these cases, on 13.12.2013 itself. This would mean that the persons. 15. who were affected by the demolition and eviction on 12.12.2013, are the writ petitioners and the members of the petitioners’ union itself. In the circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere with the orders of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the contempt appeals are dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 16. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. / / / 1 RRRJ & MRK,J Learned counsel for the appellant seeks suspension of the Order to enable the appellant to file an Appeal against the Order. Accordingly, this Order shall stand suspended for a period of four (04) weeks. Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR tr ^ SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The Registrar(Judicial), High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi 2. S.Venkateswarlu, Son of Rosaiah, Aged about 56 years, R/o. Adavitakkellapadu Village, Near Summerpeta, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District. 3. Avulamanda Narasimha Rao, S/o. Malakondaiah, Aged about 52 years, R/o. Adavitakkellapadu Village, Near Summerpeta, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District. 4. P.Easwar Rao, S/o. Pakuraiah, Aged about 33 years, R/o. Adavitakkellapadu Village, Near Summerpeta, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District. 5. B.Ramakrishna, S/o. Venkateswarlu, Aged about 45 years, R/o. Adavitakkellapadu Village, Near Summerpeta, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District. 6. The Guntur Town Mobile Laundry Union, Guntur, rep.by President, Merampalli Bala Lingayya, S/o M. Venkatayya, Aged 58 years, Hindu, R/o Adavitakkellapadu village, Summerpeta, Rajaka Colony, JKC College Road, Guntur, Guntur district. 7. Gopikrishna, Occ: Revenue Inspector, Guntur Mandal, Guntur district. 8. Prabhakara Rao, Occ: Village Revenue Officer, Adavitakkellapadu village Guntur Mandal, Guntur district. 9. Kancharla Manikya Rao, Aged 62 years, Occ: business, R/0 Srinagar, 5th line, Amaravathi Road, Guntur, Guntur district. One CC to Sri Kirthi Teja Kondaveeti, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Smt. T V Sri Devi, Advocate [OPUC] The Section Officer, Accounts Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi 10. 11. 12. 13. The Section Officer, O.S Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi 14. Three CD Copies MV vna HIGH COURT DATED: 19/02/2025 COMMON JUDGMENT CA No’s 4 and 5 of 2015 (g 2 1 MAX 2025 @ . Current Section DISMISSING THE CONTEMPT APPEALS