APHC010340712019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 823/2019 Between: 1. J BHUVANESWARI, W/O. J. NAGESH, D.NO.8-2-157/7, MEDARA VEEDHI, RAYADURGAM, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT, AGED 36 YEARS 2. C. LAVANYA,, W/O. GOPALA KRISHNA MURTHY, D.NO.15-2-151/1, BUDDANABAVI STREET, RAYADURGAM, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT, AGED 42 YEARS. 3. M. SADDAM HUSSAIN,, S/O. M. FAKRUDDIN, D.NO.9-1- 106/4, BESIDE SYNDICATE BANK, RAYADURGAM, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT, AGED 26 YEARS. 4. M. R. RAMANJANEYULU,, S/O. M. HANUMANTHAPPA, D.NO.9-1-89-34, MEDARA VEEDHI, RAYADURGAM, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT, AGED 47 YEARS. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. M PADMA, ,COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2 NV,J C.C.NO.823 OF 2019 2. SRI K SRINIVASULU, EXECUTIVE OFFICER, GROUP TEMPLES, RAYADURGAM, ANANTAPURAMU 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 pleased to punish the respondents herein under Sec.10 to 12 of contempt of Courts Act for their willful disobedience of the interims orders of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.9446/2019, dated 22- 07-2019 passed by His Lordship Sri Justice U.Durga Prasad Rao and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KARNAM RAMESH Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. G RAMANA RAO (SC FOR ENDOWMENTS RAYALASEEMAREGION) 2. The Court made the following: 3 NV,J C.C.NO.823 OF 2019 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO:823/2019 ORDER: The present contempt case is filed challenging the non- implementation of the interim order dated 22.07.2019 in W.P.No.9446 of 2019. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. 3. Pending the contempt case, the Writ Petition itself is allowed on 13.12.2019 by observing as under: “In the result, the writ petition is allowed, declaring the action of fourth respondent to invoke procedure under G.O.Ms.No.426 as illegal and arbitrary and directed not to invoke Rule 15(1) and (2) of G.O.Ms.No.426, to evict the petitioners from the premises in their occupation, while directing fourth respondent to issue notification afresh, for granting lease or license strictly adhering to Leases and Licenses Rules, 2003, as amended from time to time. There shall be no order as to costs.” 4 NV,J C.C.NO.823 OF 2019 4. In view of the disposal of the main writ petition, no further orders are required in this contempt case. 5. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. No order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 31.03.2026 LLSSPP 5 NV,J C.C.NO.823 OF 2019 329 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CONTEMPT CASE NO:823/2019 31.03.2026 LLSSPP