APHC010321852025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1616/2025 Between: 1. SHAIK MOHAMMAD ASIF JILANI, S/O. SHAIK MOHAMMAD RAFI, AGED 32 YEARS, OCC MECHANIC,R/O. DOOR NO.8/61, RAVINDRA NAGAR, CHEMMUMIYAPET, KADAPA, KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. SRI MANOJ REDDY, THE COMMISSIONER, THE KADAPA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KADAPA, KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. SRI RATNA RAJU, THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, KADAPA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KADAPA, KADAPA DISTRICT. 3. SRI DR SREEDHAR CHERUKURI, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KADAPA, KADAPA DISTRICT. 4. SRI M V S NARAYANA REDDY, THE TAHSILDAR, KADAPA MANDAL, KADAPA, KADAPA 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 may be pleased to issue summons or notice to the respondents and to punish them for intentional and willful disobedience and disrespecting the orders of this Honble Court dated 09-01-2025 W.P.No.616 of 2025 and may pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. T D PANI KUMAR Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In 2. SREEKANTH REDDY AMBATI The Court made the following: ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for willful, wanton and deliberate disobedience in implementation of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.616 of 2025 on 09.01.2025. 2. The petitioner has filed the aforesaid writ petition aggrieved by the action of the respondents in interfering with the possession of the petitioner over a land to an extent of 258.22 square yards in Chemmumiahapet, Kadapa district, wherein this Court passed the following order: “…In view of the above, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent Nos.2 to 5 not to interfere with the petitioner’s possession to an extent of 0.09 cents in Sy.No.538 of Chemmumiahapet, Kadapa Mandal and District, without following due process of law.” 3. Heard Sri. T.D. Phani Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. P. Vengala Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents. 4. Today when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4 has furnished a copy of the letter addressed by the Tahisildar, Kadapa vide Ref.A/CC/1616/2025, dated 09.10.2025 wherein it is stated that the respondents have never initiated any steps to dispossess the petitioner as alleged in the present case. 5. In view of the fact that the respondents have not initiated any steps for dispossessing the petitioner from his property, this Court is of the opinion that no contempt lies as against the respondents/contemnors. 6. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 09.10.2025 Gss