APHC010267972025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1571/2025 Between: 1. SRI KARTHIKEYA CONSTRUXTIONS, FLAT NO. 404, SUIYA RESIDENCY, SURYA TEJAS NAGAR, PALAKOL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER ANISETTY VENKATA RATNAM. 2. ANISETTY VENKATA RATNAM,, S/O. ADIYYA NAIDU, AGED 62 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O. D.NO. 17-3-1/1, PALLAPU STREET, NEAR HEAD POST OFFICE, PALACOLE, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. G SAI PRASAD IAS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES (IRRIGATION AND CAD) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, THULLUR MANDAL, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. SRI PEEYUSH KUMAR I A S, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. SMT C NAGARANI I A S, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, BHIMAVARAM. 4. SRI P NAGARJUNA RAO, SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, DRAINAGES DEPARTMENT, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 2 5. SRI CH V V S SATYANARAYANA, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DRAINAGE DIVISION, BHIMAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI 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 punish the Respondents under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for willful violation of orders of this Honble Court in W.P. No. 24692 of 2023 dated 07-11-2023 delivered by HonlDle Sri Justice Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to grant leave to file Contempt Case vide C.C. No. 1571 of 2025 in W.P.No. 24692 of 2023 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. RAMBABU KOPPINEEDI Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA I.A.No.1 of 2025 in/and CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1571/2025 ORDER: I.A.No.1 of 2025 is filed seeking to grant leave to file contempt case. 2. The contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the orders dated 11.12.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.17798 of 2023. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that I.A.No.1 of 2025 is filed seeking leave to file contempt case with delay and the contempt case is filed alleging that orders of this Court dated 07.11.2023 are not complied with as directed by this Court. 5. On perusal of the petition filed by the petitioners that the orders of this Court were served upon the respondents on 01.02.2024. While disposing of the Writ Petition, this Court directed the respondent authorities to pay claim amount within a period of six (06) weeks time period from the date of receipt of copy of the order, for release of the amount in favour of the petitioners and to comply with the orders of this Court dated 07.11.2023. If that is so, the order dated 07.11.2023 should be implemented on or before 14.03.2024. As per Section 20 of the 4 Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 the contempt is started within a period of one year from the date on which the contempt alleged to have been committed and the contempt should be filed within a period of one year from the date when the contemptuous act said to have been committed by the respondents. Therefore, the contempt case should be filed on or before 14.03.2025, but admittedly this contempt case is filed on 09.05.2025 without assigning any reasons for the delay caused at sworn affidavit filed in support of the contempt case. It is settled principle of law that any delay in invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section 20 of the Act, cannot be condoned, since the Act should be applied in strict sense. Therefore, the general principle for condonation of delay i.e., the court must be liberal, pragmatic and reasonable in allowing delay petitions is not applicable under Section 20 of the Act. 6. For better understanding Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, is extracted hereunder: “20. Limitation for actions for contempt.—No court shall initiate any proceedings of contempt, either on its own motion or otherwise, after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed.” 7. In view of the reasons stated above and on perusal of the Section 20 of the Act, 1971, I.A.No.1 of 2025 is not maintainable. Accordingly, I.A.No.1 of 2025 dismissed. Consequently, the contempt case is closed. However, if the petitioners have any grievance, they are at 5 liberty to proceed with the same by initiating appropriate proceedings. No order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 21.01.2026 TTPPSS 6 40 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA I.A.No.1 of 2025 in/and CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1571/2025 21.01.2026 TTPPSS