APHC010505312024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 4318/2024 Between: 1. K CHENNAKESAVULU, S/O K ETHIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O NO 23 P BLOCK PUSHPA NAGAR, NUNGAMBAKKAM CHENNAI TAMILNADU 600034. 2. K. PADMA,, W/O BHASKAR, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC HOME MAKER, R/O NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI TAMILNADU 600034. 3. K VENKATESWARA PRASAD,, S/O ETHIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O D NO 15/2 CPWD QUARTERS, KK NAGAR, KARUNANIDHI NAGAR, CHENNAI TAMILNADU DISTRICT 600078. 4. K SUDHAKAR, , S/O ETHIRAJULU, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O 610 PURSHPA NAGAR, NUNGAMBAKKAM CHENNAI TAMILNADU 600034 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. NISHANTH REDDY, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 2. B RAM MOHAN, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 3. G MARUTHI, THASILDAR, TIRUPATI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 4. RAMANJULA NAIK, THASILDAR, TIRUPATI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT ...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 pleased to summon the Respondents herein and punish them for willful disobedience and violation of the clear, categorical and mandatory orders passed by this Hon'ble Court dated 16-04-2024 in W.P. No. 7537 of 2024, under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts' Act, 1971 and also under Article 215 of the Constitution of India and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P SUBASH Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. APPAVU MUNIRAJ 2. J DILEEP KUMAR The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: The above contempt case has been filed complaining about the non- implementation of the order dated 16.04.2024 in W.P.No.7537 of 2024. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing on either side. 3. W.P.No.7537 of 2024, filed by the petitioners, was disposed of on 16.04.2024. The operative portion of the said order reads as follows: “……since there is no dispute with regard to the application made by the petitioners in form VI-A, as per Rule 18 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Rules, 1989, this writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission, without going into other aspects, directing respondent No.4 to consider petitioners’ claim and pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order..” 4. A reply affidavit was filed on behalf of respondent No.4. Along with the reply affidavit, an endorsement vide D.Dis.A/83/2022, dated 18.01.2025, issued by the Tahsildar, has been annexed. A perusal of the endorsement would disclose that the Tahsildar has complied with the order 16.04.2024 in W.P.No.7537 of 2024; however, with some delay. If the petitioners are aggrieved by an endorsement, they shall challenge the endorsement dated 18.01.2025. This Court does not find any merit in the contempt case, and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Contempt Case is dismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to challenge the endorsement dated 18.01.2025, if aggrieved. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 11.09.2025 TVN 290 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE No.4318 OF 2024 Date: 11.09.2025 TVN