APHC010640142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3663/2025 Between: 1. REPALLE INDIRA DEVI, W/O ANJANEYULU AGED ABOUT 61YEARS, TUMMALA VILLAGE, REPALLE MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. SRI G SAI PRASAD IAS, THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522503 2. SRI PEEYUSH KUMAR IAS, THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522503. 3. SRI P VENKATARATNAM, THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522510 4. 4. SRI P PREM KUMAR, THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DRAINAGE DIVISION, REPALLE, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522265 ...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 For the reasons mentioned in the accompanying affidavit, It is therefore prayed that this Honble High Court in the interests of justice be pleased to summon, prosecute and punish the respondents under section 10 2 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act for Willful, deliberate violation of the orders of this Honble High Court dated 17-11-2023 in the Writ petition No.27746/2023 and to pass such other order or orders which are I deemed fit and proper in the circumstance of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. T LAKSHMI PADMAJA Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3663/2025 ORDER: This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the orders dated 17.11.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.27746 of 2023. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this contempt case is filed alleging that orders of this Court dated 17.11.2023 are not complied with manner as directed by this Court. By the order dated 17.11.2023, this Court directed the respondents to clear the bill amounts of Rs.7,63,973/- to the petitioner, along with interest @ 6% per annum, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the bill amounts will carry interest @ 12% p.a., till the actual payment of the amount to the petitioner. He further submits that pending consideration of the claim of the petitioner, the petitioner herein submitted several representations requesting the respondents for release of the bill amount. But the respondents neither considered the said representations nor complied with the orders of this court. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the present contempt case has been filed at a later stage which is barred by limitation of the Contempt of Courts, Act, 1971. He further submits that once this Court passed orders dated 17.11.2023 directing to consider the case of the petitioner, to keep the matter alive, the petitioner submitting representations 4 continuously, contending that the limitation period for instituting contempt petition should starts after receipt of last representation, is contrary to the object of the section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 5. On perusal of this petition filed by the petitioner, the orders of this Court were served upon the respondents on 28.02.2024. While disposing of the Writ Petition, this Court fixed six (06) weeks time period to comply with the orders of this Court dated 17.11.2023. If that is so, the order dated 17.11.2023 should be implemented on or before 10.04.2024. As per Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 the contempt should be filed within a period of one year from the date when the contemptuous act said to have been committed by the respondents. Therefore, the contempt case should be filed on or before 10.04.2025, but admittedly this contempt case is filed on 25.11.2025 without assigning any reasons for the delay caused in sworn affidavit filed in support of the contempt case. 6. For better understanding Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, is extracted hereunder: “20. Limitation for actions for contempt.—No court shall initiate any proceedings of contempt, either on its own motion or otherwise, after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed.” 7. In view of the reasons stared above and on perusal of the Section 20 of the Act, 1971, the contempt case is not maintainable. Accordingly, the contempt 5 case is closed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law. No order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 01.12.2025 TTPPSS 6 310 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA (closed) CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3663/2025 01.12.2025 TTPPSS