APHC010264042024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI sfH FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE No: 2786 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 punish the respondent herein under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act for will full violation of the orders of this Hon’ble court and for not implementing the orders of this Hon’ble Court in WP. No.20244 of 2020 dated 02/01/2024. Between: Chunduru Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Sri Narasimha Murthy, R/o. Ramana Nagar, Velpur, Present Address- D.No. 19-22, Divvelavari Street, Velpur, Tanuku Mandal, West Godavari District- 534222 ...Petitioner AND Majji Aruna Valli, The Regional Dy. Director of Town and Country Planning, H.NO.85-7-20/1C V.L.Puram, Rajamahendravaraam-533103, East Godavari District. ...Respondent f?'- ••• / /, ■*-- Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PONNADA SREE WAS Counsel for the Respondent :SRI Y KANAKALINGESWARA RAO The Court made the following order: / APHC010264042024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTHDAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2786/2024 Between: 1.CHUNDURU SRINIVASA RAO, S/0. SRI NARASIMHA MURTHY, R/0. RAMANA NAGAR, VELPUR, PRESENT ADDRESS- D.NO. 19-22, DIVVELAVARI STREET, VELPUR, TANUKU MANUAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT- 534222 ...PETITIONER AND 1.MAJJI ARUNA VALLI, The Regional Dy. Director of Town and Country H.NO.85-7-20/1C V.L.Puram, Rajamahendravaraam- Planning, 533103, East Godavari District. ...CONTEMNOR 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 punish the respondent herein under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act for will full violation of the orders of this Honble court and for not implementing the orders of this Honble Court in WP. No.20244 of 2020 dated 02/01/2024 by Honble SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.PONNADASREE VYAS Counsel for the Contemnor: 1.Y KANAKALINGESWARA RAO ‘■’’S The Court made the following: ::ORDER:: The above contempt case has been filed complaining about the implementation of the order dated 02.01.2024. passed in W.P.No.20244 of 2020. non- 2. Heard Sri P. Sree Vyas, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y. Kanakalingeswara Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. One Sri Valluri Papa Rao, filed W.P.No.20244 of 2020 to declare the action of respondent No.3-the Regional Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning, Rajamahendravaram in according approval to the layout in TLP NO.06/2020/R vide letter bearing Roc.No. 1444/2019/R2, dated 05.03.2020 in favour of respondents 7 to 9 in an extent of Ac.3.99 cents in RS.No.187/34 (P), 3B and 191/6 (P) of Velpur Village, Tanuku Mandal, West Godavari District by filling up the existing irrigation channel (Panta Bodhi), as illegal and arbitrary. 4. The writ petition was disposed of 02.01.2024. The operative portion of the said order reads as follows: and 3. “Without going into disputed questions of fact, since the respondent passed order keeping in view, the layout in abeyance, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the a'"* respondent to consider the report of Tahsildar, Tanuku Mandal dated 21.01.2021 and the report of the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Section, Mandapaka dated 11.12.2020, the objections of the petitioners and keeping in view the Andhra Pradesh Land Development Rules, 2017 pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of four (04) weeks from today and communicate the same to the respective parties.” ^ v' i’ Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent- contemnor, in defiance of the order dated 02.01.2024, called for a report from the Tahsildar, Tanuku Mandal vide Lr.Roc.No.773/2020/R2, dated 17.02.2024. Acting upon the same, the Tahsildar submitted a report vide Roc.No.83/2020/A, dated 24.02.2024. He would also submit that calling for a report by the respondent from the Tahsildar, without adhering to the direction, is not only deliberate but also intentional. 5. A counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondent. It was contended, inter-alia, that after disposal of the writ petition, the authority passed an order dated 19.03.2024, based upon the report of Tahsildar, Tanuku and also the documents produced by the petitioner. It was further pleaded that the layout plan was not rejected, and by an endorsement, it was suggested to apply for modification. 6. As pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner, while disposing of the writ petition, this Court directed the respondent to consider the report of Tahsildar, Tanuku Mandal dated 21.01.2021, the report of the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Section dated 11.12.2020 and the objections of the writ petitioner and pass appropriate orders keeping in view of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Land Development Rules, 2017. 7. The report of Tahsildar dated 21.01.2021 is made available before this Court filed vide CCUSR No.95869 of 2025 dated 30.08.2025. A perusal of the report dated 21.01.2021 would disclose the existence of a field channel in the layout and cultivation of the lands by getting water to the said field channel. 8. After disposal of the writ petition, no doubt, as rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent called for one more report from the Tahsildar, and the Tahsildar submitted another report reiterating the contents of the report dated 21.01.2021 about the existence of the field channel and free flow of water. 9. 10. The respondent by the proceedings dated 19.03.2024, informed the petitioner to apply for a revised layout permission by incorporating the alignment of the existing panta Bodhi as shown in the detailed sketch and report in accordance with the Andhra Pradesh Land Development Rules, 2017. No doubt, calling for a report after the order dated 02.01.2024 may not arise. However, the report dated 24.02.2024, as well as the earlier report dated 21.01.2021, indicate the existence of a field channel (Panta Bodhi) in the layout. The Hon’ble Apex Court, time and again, held that the power to punish for contempt is a potent weapon and should be used with caution. Mere disobedience is not sufficient; however, it should be deliberate. In the case at hand, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is no intentional defiance on the part of the respondent-contemnor. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the act of the Tahsildar in calling for the report cannot be construed as deliberate or intentional. Hence, this Court does not find violation of the order dated 02.01.2024 passed in W.P.No.20244 of 2020. 11. 12. any 13. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K.TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. Majji Aruna Valli, The Regional Dy. Director of Town and Country Planning, H.NO.85-7-20/1C V.L.Puram, Rajamahendravaraam-533103, East Godavari District. 2. One CC to Sri Ponnada Sree Vyas, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Y Kanakalingeswara Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies \ 1 MKP HIGH COURT DATED: 19/09/2025 ORDER CC NO. 2786 OF 2024 ^ 0 7 NOV 2025 ^s4^>ntSecfa ''^sseaifiss I eo DISMISSING THE CONTEMPT CASE