APHC010413202025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] SATURDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2285/2025 Between: 1. MOGAL NOORULLA, S/O. MOGAL HUSSAIN BAIG AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. PRESIDENT, NRDS VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATIOIN, NR FUNCTION HALL, R/O. D.NO.9/421, RAYACHOTI RAOD, KADIRI, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. SRI P SAMUEL JONATHAN, Working as Commisioner, The A.P. State Information Commission First Floor, MGM Capital, Abetting NH-16 Service Road, Chinna Kakani, Mangalagiri, Near NRI Hospital, Y Junction, Guntur District - 522 508. ...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 may be pleased to punish the Respondent herein under sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Court Act,1971 for willfully and disobedience of the Orders passed by Honble Court in WP No. 6466 of 2025, dated. 18.03.2025 and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased May be pleased to recall the bailable warrants issued against the petitioner on 05.12.2025 in C.C No.2285 of 2025 on the file of this Hon'ble Court and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SHAIK MEERAVALI Counsel for the Contemnor: 1. M PITCHAIAH The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: The above contempt case was filed, complaining of a violation of the interim order dated 18.03.2025, passed in W.P. No. 6466 of 2025. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing on both sides. 3. The petitioner filed the aforementioned writ petition complaining that the second appeal filed vide Appeal No.15185/SIC-PSJ/2023, dated 05.02.2025, filed by him under Section 19(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh State Information Commission represented by its Regional Director, was not disposed of. 4. The aforementioned writ petition was disposed of on 18.03.2025, directing the authority to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible, preferably within the time stipulated under Section 19(6) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 5. In the affidavit filed in support of the contempt case, it was pleaded that the order dated 18.03.2025 has not been complied with. 6. Today, when the matter is taken up, learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that order dated 18.03.2025 has been complied with. In fact, the appellate authority passed an order on 26.09.2025, directing the respondents therein to furnish the information afresh to the appellant within seven days. The copy of order dated 26.09.2025 was handed over to learned counsel for the petitioner across the bar. 7. Thus, as seen from the compliance order dated 26.09.2025, this Court does not find any violation of the order dated 18.03.2025, passed in W.P. No. 6466 of 2025 and the contempt case is liable to be dismissed. 8. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, 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: 20.12.2025 TVN 111 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE No.2285 OF 2025 Date: 20.12.2025 TVN