APHC010058162025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 527/2025 Between: 1. AKKAM REDDY LAKSHMI,, W/O. LATE SWAMY NAIDU, AGED 56 YEARS, OCC- ANGANWADI WORKER (PRESENTLY REMOVED), R/O. VEDHURUPALLI VILLAGE, NATHAVARAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. K VIJAYA KRISHNA, DISTRICT COLIECTOR, ANAKAPALII DISTRICT, ANAKAPAILI, 2. K ANANTHA LAKSHMI, THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, WOMEN AND CHILD DEPARTMENT, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANAKAPALII. 3. K K V B SRI GOWRI, THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, ICDS PROJECT, GOIUGONDA, ANAKAPALII DISTRICT, ANAKAPAIII ...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 to issue summons or notice to the respondents and to punish them for intentionally and willfully disobedience and disrespecting the orders of this Hon'ble Court dt. 12-09-2023 in IA No. 1 of 2023 and IA No. 2 of 2023 in WP No. 23765 of 2023 Counsel for the Petitioner: 2 1. T D PANI KUMAR Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. T S RAYALU The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 527/2025 ORDER: This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the orders dated 12.09.2023 passed by this Court in I.A.No.1 of 2023 and I.A.No.2 of 2023 in W.P.No.23765 of 2023. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after hearing the matter at length, this Court was pleased to pass an interim order dated 12.09.2023 in I.A.No.1 of 2023 granting interim suspension of the impugned proceedings issued by the 4th respondent dated 19.08.2023. Similarly, this Court also passed an order in I.A.No.2 of 2023 directing the respondents not to proceed with the recruitment process in respect of post of Anganwadi worker at Vedhurupalli Anganwadi center, pending further orders. Immediately after receipt of the copy of the orders of this Court, the respondents filed vacate stay petitions in the said Writ Petition and sought for vacation of the interim orders on the ground that the petitioner is not eligible to hold the post and the same is pending for consideration. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that once this Court granted interim suspension of the impugned proceedings, the petitioner shall be reinstated in compliance of the orders of this Court. But contrary to the object of the interim order, the respondents have not taken any steps for reinstatement of 4 the petitioner on the ground that they filed vacate petition, which is pending for consideration before this Court. Therefore, the impugned action of the respondents is amounts to violation and disobedience of the orders of this Court. Hence, the respondents are liable for punishment under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that it is true that this Hon’ble Court passed interim orders in I.A.Nos.1 & 2 of 2023 as stated above. Immediately after receipt of the copy of the orders of this Court, the respondents filed vacate petitions urging that the petitioner is not entitled as prayed for and the interim orders granted by this Court liable to be vacated. 6. In view of the facts and circumstances as stated in the counter-affidavit, the learned counsel for the respondents further asserts that since there is an interim direction, pending the final orders in the Writ Petition the post of Angnwadi worker in the subject Anganwadi Center was kept vacant and waiting for the result of the Writ Petition. If the petitioner succeeds in her Writ Petition, the petitioner can be continued and appointed as Anganwadi worker in respect of the subject Anganwadi center and till the result of the Writ Petition, no contempt can be made out against the respondents herein. It is settled law once vacate petition is filed within the time and much before filing the contempt case, which is filed after one and half year i.e., after filing the vacate petition, this Court cannot proceed with the contempt case without hearing and deciding the vacate petition. 7. Considering the submissions of both the learned counsel and on perusal of the material placed on record, as contended by the learned counsel for the 5 respondents, it is settled principle/ratio laid down by this Court as well as the Hon’ble Apex Court, if any vacate petition is filed seeking to vacate the interim order, within time and before filing the contempt case, the Court cannot proceed with the contempt case without deciding the right of the petitioner as prayed in the Writ Petition. Admittedly, in the presence case, against the interim orders passed on 12.09.2023 vacate petition is filed on 06.10.2023, but contempt case is filed on 05.02.2025, which is much later to the vacate petition and having waited for more than one and half year. Moreover, the respondents have kept the subject Anganwadi worker post vacant, till the result of the writ petition. 8. In view of pendency of the Writ Petition and vacate petition, no orders can be passed in the Contempt Case. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. Further, the petitioner is at liberty to invoke the jurisdiction under Section 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, after the result of the Writ Petition. No order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 02.12.2025 TTPPSS 6 34 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA (closed) CONTEMPT CASE NO: 527/2025 02.12.2025 TTPPSS