APHC010262772018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] SATURDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CONTEMPT CASE NO: 947/2018 Between: 1. SGSM AIDED UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL,, SASTRY NAGAR,BADVEL, KADAPA DISTRICT., REP., BY ITS CORRESPONDENT K. MARY JAYAMANI, W/O LATE I.H.SAMUEL, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/O 6-2-808, SUMITRANAGAR, BADVEL, KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. SMT P SAILAJA, DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. SMT K SANDHYA RANI, COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, A.P., IBRAHIMPATNAM, AMARAVATHI. 3. SRI B PRATAPA REDDY, REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, KADAPA. 4. SRI ADITYANATH, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, VELAGAPUDI, TULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR 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 to punish Respondents under section 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1 will full violation of the orders of this Hon'ble Court passed by 2 his Lc Hon'ble Mr.Justice A.Rajashekar Reddy in W.P.M.P.No.41984 of W.P.No.33740 of 2017 dated 10.10.2017 and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. POODATTU AMARENDER Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION (AP) 3 The court made the following ORDER: The contempt case has been filed alleging wilful violation and disobedience of the interim orders dated 10.10.2017, passed in W.P.No.33740 of 2017. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri S.Bhaskar, learned counsel representing Sri. Poodattu Amarender, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the main writ petition itself was disposed of vide order dated 24.12.2025. He further submits that in view of the disposal of the writ petition, the petitioner is not inclined to pursue the instant contempt case which is filed against the interim orders dated 10.10.2017. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no further orders are required in the present case and requested to close the instant contempt case. 4. Considering the submissions made that the writ petition itself is disposed of and the petitioner is not inclined to pursue the instant contempt case, the contempt case is closed. 5. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 07.03.2026 BSP 4 20 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CONTEMPT CASE No.947 of 2018 Date: 07.03.2026 BSP