Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5332 (AP)

M/S SRI VISHNUPRIYA ENGINEERING WORKS v. SRI GOPAL KRISHNA DWIVEDI IAS

CC/564/2024 · 2025-03-27

K Manmadha Rao

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010044782024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO CONTEMPT CASE NO: 564/2024 Between: M/s Sri Vishnupriya Engineering Works ...PETITIONER AND Sri Gopal Krishna Dwivedi Ias and Others ...CONTEMNOR(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. DASARI S V V S V PRASAD Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. C SUMON 2. N ASWARTHA NARAYANA The Court made the following: ORDER : This Contempt Case is filed to punish the respondents under Section 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act for willful disobedience of orders of this Court dated 16.12.2022 passed in WP No.38349 of 2022. 2. This Court vide order dated 16.12.2022 in WP No.38349 of 2022 has disposed of the writ petition. The operative portion of the said order, reads as under: “In view of the aforesaid directions of this court in various cases and after hearing both sides, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to complete the verification process within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter to pay the amounts due to the petitioner depending upon the outcome of the verification within a period of six (6) weeks. It would also be open to the petitioner to agitate their claim for interest, if any payable by the respondents in an appropriate forum. No costs In view of the foregoing discussion, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.” 3. Heard Sri Dasari S.V.V.S.V. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N.Aswartha Narayana, learned counsel for the respondents. 4 On hearing, Sri N. Aswartha Narayana, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that, the respondents have already paid the entire amounts to the petitioner and hence no orders are required to be passed in the present contempt case. 5. In reply, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, by recording the same, the present contempt case may be closed. 6. Recording the submissions of both the learned counsels, the Contempt Case is closed. No costs. 7. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ___________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J. Date : 27-03-2025 Gvl HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.564 of 2024 Date : 27-03-2025 Gvl