Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 50542 (AP)

SMT DIDDI SRILATHA v. V DHANALAKSHMI

CC/4332/2024 · 2025-09-18

Subba Reddy Satti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010510302024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 4332/2024 Between: 1. SMT DIDDI SRILATHA, W/O. VINODH, AGED 32 YEARS, VILLAGE ORGINISATION ASSISTANT (VOA), MADANNAGARIPALLI SANGHABANDHAM - 1, R/O. MADANNAGARIPALLI VILLAGE, KALUVOYA MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. V DHANALAKSHMI, Occ Cluster Co-ordinator (CC), District Rural Development Agency (DRDA - Velugu), Kulluru Cluster, Kaluvoy Mandal, Nellore District, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh. ...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 issue notice to the respondent/contemnor herein, and punish her under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Court Act, for willfully, deliberately disobeyed and flouted the Orders dated 21-08-2024 passed in IA.No.1 of 2024 in WP.No.18249 of 2024 by this Honourable Court, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ASHOK KONDETI Counsel for the Contemnor: 1. G RAJU The Court made the following: 2 :: ORDER :: Heard Sri Ashok Kondeti, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.Raju, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The above contempt case is filed complaining about the violation of the interim order dated 21.08.2024 in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in W.P.No.18249 of 2024. 3. The petitioner filed the aforementioned writ petition to declare the action of respondents 4 to 7 (official respondents) in preventing her from discharging duties as VOA for Madannagaripalli Sanghabandham-1, Madannagaripalli Village, Kaluvoya Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, as illegal and arbitrary. An interim order was granted on 21.08.2024, directing the respondents 4 to 7 not to interfere with the petitioner discharging duties as VOA. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the contempt case, it was contended that despite the interim order dated 21.08.2024, the respondent restrained the petitioner from discharging duties as VOA. 5. A counter-affidavit was filed by the respondent by annexing the resolution passed by the society dated 20.08.2024, electing N.Vijaya Kumari as VOA of the society. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the resolution dated 20.08.2024 is fabricated at the instance of the respondent and other officials. 7. Whether the resolution dated 20.08.2024 is genuine or fabricated may not be germane for consideration, while adjudicating the proceedings filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The petitioner must pursue the same before the appropriate authority. 8. Given the resolution dated 20.08.2024 filed along with the counter- affidavit, this Court is of the considered opinion that the interim order dated 21.08.2024 in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in W.P.No.18249 of 2024 has not been violated. Accordingly, the contempt case is closed. No costs. 3 As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 19.09.2025 SNI 4 733 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 4332 / 2024 Date: 19.09.2025 SNI