APHC010249922025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1724/2025 Between: 1. ESUKAPALLE NAGESWARAMMA, W/O BONGARI BALAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCC VOA OF THE KOMMURI KOTTALA VILLAGE WOMEN MUTALLY AIDED COOPERATIVE THRIFT SOCIETY KUMARI KOTTALU, R/O 849A KOMMURI KOTTALA VILLAGE, BETHAMCHARLA MANDAL, NANDHYALA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. SRI MADHU SUDHARSHAN GOUD, THE ASSISTANT PROJECT MANAGER BETHAMCHARLA MANDAL NANDHYALA DISTRICT 2. SRI K MAHESWARI, THE COMMUNITY COORDINATOR D R D A VEKIGU BETHAMCHARLA MANDAL NANDHYALA DISTRICT ...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 Pleased punish the respondents No. 1 and 2 /Contemner herein for his willful violation and deliberate disobedience of the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court in WP No. 29677 of 2024 dated 17.12.2024 under sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Nandipalle Venkatesh Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1 . The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: The above contempt case is filed complaining of violation of order, dated 17.12.2024 in W.P.No.29677 of 2024. 2. The petitioner filed the aforementioned writ petition to declare the action of the Assistant Project Manager, Bethamcharla Mandal, Nandhyala District and Community Coordinator, D.R.D.A. Velugu, Bethamcharla Mandal, Nandhyala District, in interfering with the petitioner’s discharging duties as Village Organization Assistant (VOA) of K-Kotallu Grama Lykya Sangam, Kumari Kottalu, Bethamcherla Mandal, Nandhyala District, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. The said writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage, directing respondents 4 and 5 therein not to interfere with the petitioner’s discharging duties as VOA of the above mentioned society. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the contempt case, it was pleaded that despite the order, dated 17.12.2024, the respondents interfered with her discharging duties. 5. A counter affidavit was filed by respondent No.1, by annexing a copy of the resolution dated 30.11.2024. A perusal of the resolution would disclose that the petitioner was removed as VOA vide resolution dated 30.11.2024 and the Society elected, one Smt. K. Pushpanjali as VOA. This fact was not pleaded in the writ petition. 6. Given the resolution, dated 30.11.2024, since the petitioner was removed as VOA of the Society, the complaint of the petitioner regarding violation of the order, dated 17.12.2024, does not arise. 7. Hence, this contempt case is dismissed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Dated: 31.10.2025 IKN