APHC010322102026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE 10th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2380 OF 2026 Between: 1. Kanugula Kalavathi,, W/o. Rama Rao, Aged about 72 years, Occ. Home Maker, R/o. Kanugulavanipeta Ippili Village, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh- 532401. ...Petitioner AND 1. K Sangeeth Madhur, The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh - 531163. 2. P Rama Rao, The Tahsildar, Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh - 531022. 3. Abhishikth Kishore, The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh - 530002. ...Respondents 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 punish the respondents under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for wilfully violating and disobeying the orders of this Honble Court in W.P. No.5763 of 2025 dated 08.05.2025 and pass 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: NALLURI RAMESH BABU Counsel for the Respondents: K M KRISHNA REDDY The Court made the following order: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2380 OF 2026 ORDER: This contempt case is filed against the respondent for willful disobedience of the orders dated 08.05.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.5763 of 2025. 2. No representation on behalf of the petitioner on 03.09.2026. Even today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Heard the learned counsel for the respondents. 3. On 03.09.2026, the learned counsel for the respondents represented that the orders of this Court are complied with and due procedure was followed as required under the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (in short ‘the Act, 1905’) as directed by this Court and furnished written instructions dated 03.09.2026 to that effect. 4. For better determination, it is appropriate for this Court to extract the orders dated 08.05.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.5763 of 2025 hereunder: “Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition directing the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner’s subject property without following due process of law.” 5. On perusal of the orders of this Court as extracted above and in view of the written instructions dated 03.09.2026 issued by the respondents, it is 4 observed that there is a specific direction to the respondents that they shall follow the due procedure as contemplated under the Act while taking steps for eviction/removal of the petitioner from the alleged encroachment. However, in compliance of the orders of this Court, the respondents issued a notice dated 29.09.2025 under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, calling upon the petitioner to submit her explanation. Since the petitioner did not submit any objection or explanation to the notice issued under Section 7 of the Act, 1905, the respondents issued a notice dated 08.10.2025 under Section 6 of the Act, 1905. It is further observed that even after receipt of the notice under Section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, the petitioner herein neither submitted any explanation/objection nor filed any appeal. Finally the respondents passed an order of eviction on 14.10.2025 directing removal of encroachment from the Government land. 6. In view of the orders dated 08.05.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.5763 of 2025 as extracted supra, it is evident from the written instructions dated 03.09.2026 that the respondents have followed the due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905. Therefore, the orders of this Court stand complied with no further orders are necessary and the present contempt case is liable to be closed. 7. Accordingly, The Contempt Case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 5 Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 10.09.2026 BSP 6 145 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA (closed) CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2380 OF 2026 10.09.2026 BSP