APHC010584992025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3298/2025 Between: 1. KARRI KRUPA JYOTHI, W/O. CH VENUGOPAL PRABHU KIRAN, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 4174/1, KANNAMAMBA STREET, AC GARDENS, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A. P. ...PETITIONER AND 1. P PRAVEEN KUMAR, Chief Executive Officer, The District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd, CEO Office at Nagamalli thota, Kakinada, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh - 533003 ...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 pleased to punish the respondent authorities for his willful, deliberate disobedience of the order under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act passed by the Honble High Court in W.P. No. 9927 of 2025 dated 29.04.2025 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K SRINIVASA PRASAD Counsel for the Contemnor: 1. . Page 2 of 3 The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: The above contempt case was filed complaining of the violation of the order dated 29.04.2025, passed I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.9927 of 2025. 2. The District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, represented by its Chief Executive Officer along with the Branch Manager, filed W.P.No.9927 of 2025, challenging the proceedings in A.P.S.E Appeal No.02 of 2023, dated 02.12.2024. The said writ petition was admitted, and an interim order was passed in I.A.No.1 of 2025. The operative portion of the interim order reads as follows: “Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the direction of respondent No.3, confirmed by respondent No.2 in respect of payment of full back wages alone, is suspended. Since 50% of the amount was deposited, respondent No.4 is at liberty to withdraw the same, however, subject to the outcome of writ petition.” 3. Sri Srinivas Basava, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, would submit that, in pursuance of the interim order dated 29.04.2025, the petitioner in the contempt case/respondent No.4 in the writ petition has withdrawn 50% of the amount deposited. He would also submit that by separate proceedings, the petitioner’s service was terminated. 4. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any violation of the order dated 29.04.2025 passed I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.9927 of 2025, and the contempt case is liable to be dismissed. 5. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 21.11.2025 TVN 194 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE No.3298 OF 2025 Date: 21.11.2025 TVN