1 APHC010025222017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1838/2017 Between: 1. AGURU SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O LATE VENKATARAMANA, AGED 45 YEARS, R/O GARIVIDI VILLAGE & MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. AGURU SAMPATH KUMARI,, W/O CHANDRAMOULI, AGED 46 YEARS, R/O MUGADA VILLAGE,BADANGI MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. SRI DHANUNJAY REDDY LAS, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT AT SRIKAKULAM. 2. SRI REDDY GUNNAYYA, THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALAKONDA, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. SRI Y SRINIVASA RAO, THE TAHSILDAR, RAJAM MANDAL, SRIKAKULARN DISTRICT. ...CONTEMNOR(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. M V SURESH Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2 The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri M.V. Suresh, learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Sri T. Sanjeeva Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents. 2. The present Contempt Case is filed complaining of the noncompliance of the Order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 06.01.2016 in W.P.No.41992 of 2015. The Respondent No.3 has filed Counter Affidavit on 16.11.2017 seeking six months’ time for passing appropriate Orders. When this matter was listed on 27.11.2025, this Court had directed the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents to ascertain the correct status. 3. Sri T. Sanjeeva Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents has submitted Written Instructions furnished by the Tahsildar, Rajam dated 05.11.2025 along with material papers. Copy of it is supplied to the Counsel for the Petitioners and the same is taken on record. One of the material papers is the Proceeding issued by the Inam Tahsildar and the Tahsildar, Rajam bearing Rc.542/2018/B dated 10.05.2018 which has been passed in compliance of the Order of this Court dated 06.01.2016 in W.P.No.41992 of 2015. 4. Having considered the same, this Court is of the view that the Respondents have complied with the Order of this Court by passing a Speaking Order on 10.05.2018 (mentioned supra) and therefore, the Order of this Court dated 06.01.2016 in W.P.No.41992 of 2015 has been complied with. Accordingly, this Contempt Case is closed. No order as to costs. 5. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 10.12.2025 Vns