APHC010010282026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] MONDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CONTEMPT CASE NO: 216/2026 Between: 1. K S S RAMALAKSHMI, W/O BHS BHASKARARAO, AGED 57 YEARS, OCC PANCHAYAT SECRETARY GR.L/ RESOURCES PERSON-DPRC (UNDER SUSPENSION) O/O DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, W.G.DISTRICT, AT BHIMAVARAM. ...PETITIONER AND 1. SRI M V R KRISHNA TEJA IAS, The Commissioner of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, State of A.P. Tadepalli, Guntur District. ...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 pleased to punish the respondent herein under Section 10 to 12 of Contempt Courts Act for willfully violation of the interim orders of this Honble Court in W.P.No.27624/2025 dated 09-10-2025 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M R TAGORE Counsel for the Contemnor: 1. G RAJU The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Contempt Case No.216 of 2026 ORDER: 1. The present Contempt Case is filed for non-compliance of the Order, dated 09.10.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.27624 of 2025. 2. The W.P.No.27624 of 2025 was filed questioning the suspension of the Petitioner from the post of Panchayat Secretary Grade-I vide proceedings in e.Proc.No.2948258/CPR/N1/2025-3, dated 08.09.2025. 3. This court after hearing learned counsel appearing on both sides, passed an interim order, directing Respondent No.2 to examine the explanation of the Petitioner dated 11.09.2025, taking into consideration the fact that an audit was completed for the relevant period the Petitioner worked as Panchayat Secretary at Kaikaluru Gram Panchayat, Krishna District. 4. Pursuant thereto, as the interim order passed by this Court was not complied with, the present Contempt Case was filed. 5. Learned counsel for the Respondent passed on proceedings issued by the Respondent vide e.Procgs.No.2948258/CPR/N1/2025, dated 19.02.2026, whereunder the explanation of the Petitioner was rejected. 3 6. In that view, the Contempt Case is closed, leaving it open to the Petitioner to challenge the correctness of the order passed by the Respondent, which was referred to above. 7. No order as to costs. 8. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 09.03.2026 chs 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY 141 Contempt Case No.216 of 2026 Date: 09.03.2026 chs