HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI MAIN CASE No: C.C.No.323 of 2025 PROCEEDINGS SHEET SL. NO. DATE ORDER OFFICE NOTE 12. 22.04.2026 TRR, J I.A.No.02 of 2025 In C.C.No.323 of 2025 This petition is filed to set aside the order dated 29.08.2025 and restore the C.C.No.323 of 2025 to its file. When this Court has subsequently posed a question to the learned counsel for the petitioner about the maintainability of the application, he relied on the Judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Rajaram Woman Masurkar Vs. Lokmanya Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Vadavali and others reported in 2007 SCC online Bombay 649, in which it is held that: <The Court exercising contempt jurisdiction has the power to dismiss for default simpliciter a contempt petition and equally has the power to restore the same= Hence, for the reasons stated in the affidavit and in view of the judgment of the Bombay High Court, I.A.No.02 of 2025 is allowed and C.C.No.323 of 2025 is restored and taken to the file. Contd., 2 SL. NO. DATE ORDER OFFICE NOTE 22.04.2026 C.C.No.323 of 2025 The learned counsel for respondent No.2, Sri Aravala Rama Rao, wrongly represented and stated that the orders of this Court have been complied by the respondents. Believing the statement of the counsel for the respondents the contemt case is closed. As per the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondents have not complied the orders of this Court. For wrong representation made by the counsel for the respondent No.2, the respondent No.2 shall be present before this Court on the next date of hearing. List on 30.04.2026. Delete the name of learned counsel Ms.P.Vijaya Kumari, in the cause list. __________ TRR, J GRL 3 SL. NO. DATE ORDER OFFICE NOTE