IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ATAMARAVATI THURSDAY THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL / TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE 6 PRESENT ^ THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 4069 OF 2024 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 direct the notices to the respondents herein and punish the respondents for deliberate, intentional and willful violation of the orders of this Hon’ble Court dated 07.05.2024 made in W.P.No. 9291 of 2024. JA Between: Donga Yesu Babu, S/o Donga Krishna, Aged about 46 years, R/o D.No. 2- 32/2, Mutyalapalle, Varatippa Village, Near Pond, Mogaltur Mandal, West Godavari District. ...Petitioner AND Shashibhushan Kumar, Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur. C Nagarani, District Collector, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District I. Jyothirmai, The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Sitharamapuram, Narsapur, West Godavari District. Manchiraju Sita Rama Rao, Panchayat Secretary, Varatippa Village Mogalthum Mandal, West Godavari District. 1. 2. 3. 4. ...Contemners Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SATHEESH KUMAR EERLA Counsel for the Respondents: SRI Y KOTESWARA RAO The Court made the following order: APHC.(H0468022024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 4069/2024 Between: Donga Yesu Babu ...PETITIONER AND Shashibhushan Kumar and others ...CONTEMNOR(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.SATHEESH KUMAR EERLA Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1.YKOTESWARARAO 2.. The Court made the following order: This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the respondents for willful disobedience of the order dated 07.05.2024 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.9291of 2024. 2. Heard Sri Eerla Satheesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Y.Koteswararao, learned counsel for the respondents. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court vide order dated 07.05.2024 in Writ Petition No.9291 of 2024 directed the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 09.03.2024 in accordance with law, by providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and pass a reasoned order within three months from the date of receipt of the said order. Pursuant to the said direction, the petitioner made applications to respondent Nos.2 and 4 on 08.07.2024 and 24.06.2024 and also personally approached them with the order copy. However, till date, respondent Nos.2 and 4 are not implementing the order of this Court, which amounts to willful and deliberate violation of the order of this Court. Hence, prayed to punish the respondents under Section 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents while reiterating the contents of the counter affidavit of Panchayat Secretary-respondent No.4 contended that respondent No.4, after receipt of the Court order, has secured all the necessary documents and thereafter he was transferred on 16.08.2024 from the subject place and the next incumbent has conducted Gram Panchayat General Meeting on 17.09.2024 and issued notice to the petitioner dated 26.09.2024 to appear before him to provide necessary documents, but the petitioner has not provided any relevant documents, as such, the Panchayat Secretary has passed final order dated 24.10.2024 rejecting the claim of the petitioner for levying House Tax on the ground that the subject construction was taken place in R.S.No. 192/1 which is classified as 3 ‘Government Land’ and the issue of levy of house tax to the subject building placed before the Gram Panchayat and the same was also rejected by resolution vide PR No.12, dated 17.09.2024. The said rejection order was communicated to the petitioner. He further submitted that if at all the petitioner has any grievance against the said order, he has to approach appropriate forum in accordance with law. There is no willful negligence and disobedience and violation of orders of this Court. Hence, prayed to dismiss the Contempt was Case. 5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the reply affidavit contended that the petitioner has constructed house in RS No.192, but not in R.S.No.192/1. Respondent No.4 misleads the Court showing the survey number as R.S No.192/1 and the said survey number belongs to Government land/Gayalu, but as per the adangal it is Gramakantam land. Perused the record and considered the submissions of learned counsel 6. for the parties. This Court while disposing of the Writ Petition No.9291 of 2024 passed the following order dated 07.05.2024. 7. “The respondent authorities are directed to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 09.03.2024 in accordance with law, by providing an opportunity of personal hearing to him and to pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner within three (3) months from the date of receipt of the copy of order.” 8. Perusal of the counter affidavit of respondent No.4 would indicate that respondent No.4 has issued notice dated 26.09.2024 to the petitioner to appear before him along with necessary documents, but the petitioner has provided any relevant documents not as such, respondent No.4 has passed order dated 24.10.2024 rejecting to levy house tax to the petitioner's house. 9. It is the contention of the petitioner that respondent No.4 has not passed the said rejection order in right perspective and true spirit. 10. This Court cannot adjudicate as to whether the order passed by respondent No.4 is in accordance with law or not and whether the authority has taken into consideration the facts and circumstances of the petitioner’s in a right perspective or not under the Contempt of Courts Act. contempt jurisdiction is summary in nature and whiie entertaining a contempt petition, the Court's inquiry shaii be iimited, and it cannot delve into disputed questions of fact. This Court, under Contempt of Courts Act case The shall only a willful disobedience of any adjudicate upon the fact whether there is judgment/order passed by the Court or not. 11. In the present case, pursuant to the directions of this Court, No.4 has passed final order dated 24.10.2024 after issuing notice to the petitioner. If the petitioner intends to question the said respondent order, he has to approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law. Since the petitioner 5 has not satisfied the requirements of the contempt as mandated by the statutory provisions, this Court is not inclined to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. However, the petitioner 12. is at liberty to question the order of the Panchayat Secretary dated 24.10.2024 before appropriate forum in accordance with law. 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// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. Sri Shashibhushan Kumar, Principal Secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur. 2. C Nagarani, District Collector, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District 3. I. Jyothirmai, The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Sitharamapuram, Narsapur, West Godavari District. 4. Manchiraju Sita Rama Rao, Panchayat Secretary, Varatippa Village, Mogalthum Mandal, West Godavari District. 5. One CC to Sri Satheesh Kumar Eerla, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri Y Koteswara Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CD Copies RAM HIGH COURT DATED :03/04/2025 ORDER CC.No.4069 of 2024 DISMISSING THE CONTEMPT CASE WITHOUT COSTS