Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 45989 (AP)

D.V. RAMANA RAJU v. G. SUMATHI

CC/1443/2025 · 2025-08-29

Subba Reddy Satti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IC010292922025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI SATURDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1443 OF 2025 Contempt Case filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971, to punish the respondent herein under Section 10 to 12 of Contempt Courts Act for willfully violation of the final orders of this Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.21806 of 2023 dated 13.02.2025. Between: D.V. Ramana Raju, S/o late Venkatapathi Raju, aged 62 years, Occ: Office Sub-ordinate, O/o The Asst. Commissioner (ST), Tuni, Kakinada District. ...Petitioner AND 1. G. Sumathi, The Joint Commissioner (ST), Kakindada Division Kakinada District, Erstwhile E.G.District. 2. Sri M Prem Kumar, The Asst. Commissioner (ST), Tuni Circle, Tuni, Kakinada District, Erstwhile E.G.District. ...Respondents (R2 is not necessary party) 4 4 \ Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri M.R. Tagore, Advocate Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Sri G. Raju, Advocate The Court made the following order: APHC010292922025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] SATURDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1443/2025 Between: I.D.V. RAMANA RAJU, S/0 LATE VENKATAPATHI RAJU, AGED 62 YEARS OCC OFFICE SUB-ORDINATE, 0/0 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER (ST), TUNI, KAKINADA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1.G SUMATHI, THE JOINT COMMISSIONER ST KAKINDADADIVISION, KAKINADA DISTRICT ERSTWHILE E.G.DISTRICT. 2.SRI M PREM KUMAR, THE ASST. COMMISSIONER ST , TUNI CIRCLE, TUNI, KAKINADA DISTRICT ERSTWHILE E.G.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 may be pleased to punish the respondent herein under Section 10 to 12 of Contempt Courts Act for willfully violation of the final orders of this Honble Court in W.P.No.21806/2023 dated 13-02-2025 and may pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.M R TAGORE Counsel for the Contemnor(S): / 1.GRAJU 2 of 3 The Court made the following order : Heard Sri M.R. Tagore, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G. Raju, learned counsel for the respondents. The writ petition filed .by the petitioner was disposed of on 13.02.2025 directing respondent No.3 therein i.e. Joint Commissioner, State tax, Kakinada Division, East Godavari District, to consider the petitioner’s representation and pass appropriate orders. Complaining non-implementation, of the said order, the above contempt case has been filed. 2. 3.- Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though a direction was given to the Joint Commissioner, State Tax, Kakinada Division, the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tuni Circle, Tuni, passed the order vide Rc.No.A1/20/2022 dated 15.05.2025 and hence, the order of this Court has not been complied with. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that though direction was given to the Joint Commissioner, State Tax, Kakinada Division, the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tuni Circle, Tuni is the competent authority to consider and re-fix the petitioner’s salary. Hence, the said authority considered the petitioner’s representation dated 26.06.2023 and passed an appropriate order. 4. No doubt, as seen from the order dated 13.02.2025, a direction was given to the Joint Commissioner, State Tax, Kakinada Division. As per the contention of learned counsel for the respondents, the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tuni Circle, Tuni, who is also party respondent to the writ . petition and the said authority is the competent authority to consider the petitioner’s representation. 5. The contention of learned counsel for the respondents is recorded. 3 of 3 7. Since, a speaking order has been passed in compliance with the order of this Court, this Court does not find any violation of the order, dated 13.02.2025. 8. Hence, this contempt case is closed. However, it is open to the petitioner to challenge the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tuhi Circle, Tuni, vide Rc.No.A1/20/2022 dated 15.05.2025, before appropriate forum, if he is aggrieved. an As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K TAyA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// I SECTION OFFICER To, 1. Sri G. Sumathi, The Joint Commissioner (ST), Kakindada Division Kakinada District, Erstwhile E.G.District. 2. Sri li/l Prem Kumar,*The Asst. Commissioner (ST), Tuni Circle, Tuni Kakinada District? Erstwhile E.G.District. 3. One GC to Sri Sri M.R. Tagore, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri G. Raju, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies BSP vna \ v HIGH COURT DATED: 30/08/2025 I [; t! f! [! I ORDER CC NO. 1443 OF 2025 ,1 i I" 0 3 NOV 2025 i CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE r-L,