Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 39915 (AP)

B SRINIVASA RAO v. SRI M SIVA PRASAD

CC/1647/2025 · 2025-11-06

Subba Reddy Satti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010316952025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1647/2025 Between: 1. B SRINIVASA RAO, S/O. KOTESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC ASSISTANT ENGINEER (HOUSING) / INCHARGE OF AGRICULTURE MARKET COMMITTEE GODOWN, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA, O/O. ANDHRA PRADESH HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED G. KONDURU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT AND ALSO R/O.FLAT NO.S-1, SAI MITRA RESIDENCY, 4TH LANE, UMA SHANKAR NAGAR, KANURU, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. SRI M SIVA PRASAD, OCC MANAGING DIRECTOR IN APSHC LTD., (FULL ADDITIONAL CHARGE) OFFICE OF AP STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED, HEAD OFFICE, NIRMAAN BHAVAN, PLOT NO. 11 AND 12, BEHIND FIRE STATION, AUTO NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT - 520007 2. SRI M RAJANI KUMARI, BCC DISTRICT HEAD - HOUSING, THE AP STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED NTR DISTRIC ...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 punish the Respondents herein under sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Court Act for non-implementation of the orders of this Honble Court passed in lA No. 1 of 2025 in WP No. 3914 of 2025 dated 14.02.2025, after using the notice to the Respondent herein in the interest of Justice and pass such 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 to direct the respondents herein not to initiate the Criminal action against the Petitioner pending disposal of the Contempt case and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K RAMA KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY R The Court made the following: ORDER The above contempt case was filed complaining of violation of the order dated 14.02.2025 in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.3914 of 2025. 2. The petitioner filed the aforementioned writ petition challenging the proceedings issued by the Managing Director of the Andhra Pradesh State Housing Corporation Limited vide Lr.Rc.No.1910/V3/NTR/DEPT/2024, dated 30.01.2025, placing the petitioner under suspension, pending enquiry. The said proceedings, impugned, were suspended by this Court on 14.02.2025, pending the writ petition. The petitioner made a representation dated 20.02.2025 to drop further action and issued posting orders. Thereafter, the above contempt case was filed. 3. The respondents 1 and 2 filed a counter-affidavit. 4. Sri K. Rama Koteswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, would contend that the respondents violated the order dated 14.02.2025, deliberately and intentionally. Page 3 of 3 5. Sri R.Kalyana Chakravarthi, learned counsel for the respondents, would contend that in pursuance of the interim order passed by this Court, the petitioner never reported to duty and the petitioner retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.03.2025, and the authorities never violated the order passed by this Court. 6. As seen from the material available on record, this Court suspended the proceedings issued by the Managing Director of the Andhra Pradesh State Housing Corporation Limited, suspending the petitioner pending enquiry. The representation made by the petitioner to drop further proceedings does not arise, in view of the pendency of the departmental enquiry. The petitioner could not report to duty for the reasons best known. However, since the petitioner retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.03.2025, this Court does not find any violation of the order passed by this Court by the respondents. 7. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI PVD