IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1866 OF 2022 Contempt case under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 to punish the respondents herein for wilful disobedience of the order of the Hon'ble Court dated 07.10.2021 passed in WP N0.22719 of 2021 Between: 1. Ruttala Venkata Rao, S/o Late Narayana, Aged about 58 years, R/o H.no. 326B Sector 8, Ukkunagaram Steel Plant, Visakhapatnam. Ruttala Krishna Murthy, S/o Late Narayan, Aged about 50 years, R/o H.no. 3145/3/49, Road No.1 Pratap Enclave, SLN Colony, Chingicharla, Hyderabad. Ruttala Seshagiri Rao,, S/o Late Narayana, Aged about 45 years, R/o H.no. 8-144, Venkateswaranagar Colony, Malkarjgiri, Hyderabad. 2. 3. ...Petitioners/petitioners AND 1. Sri K.Kanna Babu, Principal Secretary(Revenue) cum Relief Commissioner, Secretariat,Velagapudi, Amravati, AP. 2. Sri Rattan shetti Ravi Subhash, IAS The District Collectbr,Collector office, Visakapatnam District. 3. Sri Ronanki Govinda Rao, The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narsipatnam, Visakapatnam District. 4. Smt G.Rani Ammaji, The Tahsildar, Makavarapalem Mandal Visakapatnam District. 5. Sri.Narendra babu, The Mandal Revenue Inspector, Makavarapalem Mandal, Visakapatnam District. ...Contemnors/Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners : Smt K Aruna Counsel for the Respondents: SRI Nagaraju Pullagura SRI G L NARASIMHA REDDY The Court made the following: APHC010287472022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1866/2022 Between: Ruttala Venkata Rao and others ...PETITIONER(S) AND K Kanna Babu and others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.KARUNA Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1.NAGARAJU PULLAGURA 2.NARASIMHA REDDY. G . L The Court made the following order: ...CONTEMNOR(S) This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the respondents for willful disobedience dated 07.10.2021 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.22719 of 2021. of the order 2. Heard Smt K.Aruna, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Nagaraju Pullagura, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri G.L.Narsimha Reddy, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 5. f I X 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, contended that this Court passed order in Writ Petition No.22719 of 2021 directing the respondents to dispose of the petitioners representation dated 19.07.2021 in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. On receipt of the said order the petitioners made a representation along with the order to the authorities in the month of August, 2021. Thereafter they personally visited the office of the authorities and made representations for making corrections in revenue records, but till today no action has been taken by the authorities. He further submitted that the petitioners got issued a legal notice by registered post for implementing the orders of the Court, but till today the respondents had not taken any steps in that regard, which amounts to willful disobedience of the order of this Court, hence, the respondent authorities are liable to be punished under the Contempt of Courts Act. 4. Sri G.L.Narsimha Reddy, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 5 while reiterating the contents of the counter affidavits of respondent Nos.2 to 4 contended that in obedience to the orders of this Court, the Tahsildar, Makavarapalem has issued Endorsement dated 06.06.2022 to the petitioners as the request for de-notification of subject land from the list of prohibited lands notified under Section 22(A) cannot be considered. Further the request of the petitioners for de-notification of the subject land for deletion from 22-A list was rejected vide complaint No.7369/2022/L2-dated 29.09.2022 of the District Collector, Anakapalli, as the petitioners are not in possession of the subject land and the same is under the control of Panchayat Raj Department and it is being used as ‘Shandy place’ for public purpose since 1963-64. The said proceedings were served on the petitioners through RPAD on 08.08.2024 acknowledged by the petitioners on 09.08.2024. He further submitted that the orders of this Court have duly been complied with. Hence, prayed to dismiss the Contempt Case. 5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioners while reiterating the contents affidavit contended that the Tahsildar’s endorsement that the request for de-notification of the schedule land from the list of Prohibited lands notified under Section 22A cannot be considered with an ante-date i.e. 06.06.2022 and the consequential rejection order of the District Collector dated 29.09.2022 was never served on the petitioners. He further submitted that the rejection order was passed without application of mind and only to get the contempt proceeding and to start another round of litigation. He submitted that the petitioners have questioned the orders passed by respondents by filing independent Writ Petitions. Since the respondents have not complied with the orders in true spirit, they are liable for punishment and accordingly prayed to allow the Contempt Case. 6. Respondent No.2 filed additional affidavit stating that the then Tahsildar was directed by him to serve the order on the petitioners immediately, but later to know that the copy of order were not served on the petitioners and when enquired the same, the then Tahsildar. Makavarapalem has submitted his explanation stating that due to administrative exigencies such as Resurvey and the same was of the reply , on over further the it came work, he could not follow up the action taken in this regard. Soon after he came to know about the same, speaking order was served though registered post in the month of August 2024. He further submitted that the reasons for delay in this regard are not at all intentional, but completely due to administrative exigencies only and the delay was happened inadvertently, beyond that, there is no willful disobedience of the order of this Court, however rendered unconditional apology for the inconvenience caused due to them and prayed to exonerate the respondents/contemnors from the Contempt Case. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by learned 7. counsel for the respective parties. This Court, while disposing of the Writ Petition No.22719 of 2021 passed the following order dated 07.10.2021; 8. “In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing respondents to dispose of the representation dated 19.07.2021 submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order”; It is not in dispute that respondent authorities have adjudicated the petitioners’ representation and passed orders, however with certain delay. The authorities have also sent the said copy of the order to the petitioners with further delay. Perusal of the counter and the submissions made by learned 9. -i=5 counsel for the parties, this Court is satisfied with the reasons explained by the respondents for the delay. 10. Taking the submissions of both the learned counsel and the contents of the counter affidavits of the respondents into consideration, as the petitioners have contended that they have already questioned the orders passed by the respondents by filing independent cases, this Court feels it appropriate that this Contempt is liable to be dismissed, as there is no willful disobedience as alleged by the petitioners. 11. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any in the Contempt Case, shall stand closed. \ Sd/- E KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR \ //TRUE COPY// r SECTION OFFICER To, 1. Sri K.Kanna Babu, Principal Secretary(Revenue) cum Relief Commissioner, Secretariat,Velagapudi, Amravati, AP. 2. Sri Rattan shetti Ravi Subhash, IAS The District Collector,Collector office, Visakapatnam District. 3. Sri Ronanki Govinda Rao, The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narsipatnam, Visakapatnam District. 4. Smt G.Rani Ammaji, The Tahsildar, Makavarapalem Mandal, Visakapatnam District. 5. Sri.Narendra babu. The Mandal Revenue Inspector, Makavarapalem Mandal, Visakapatnam District. 6. One CC to Smt. K Aruna, Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Sri.G.L. Nagaraju Pullagura, Advocate [OPUC] S.Three CD Copies Dvp nm HIGH COURT DATED:09/04/2025 ORDER £? CC.No.1866 of 2022 g 1 3 OCT 2025 ^ Current Section col. The Contempt Case is Dismissed