IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2087/2021 Between: 1. P.VENKATA KISHORE BABU,, S/O. P. SUBBARAO AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC- BUSINESS R/O. 2-143, ALINAGARAM, LINGALA POST MANDAVALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. D V N JANAKI LAKSHMI, OCC- SECRETARY TO ALINAGARAM GRAMPANCHAYAT ALINAGARAM, MANDAVALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT 2. SHAIK KADHER BASHA ANARI, S/O SHAIK BAJI, R/O. ALINAGARAM, MANDAVALLI MANDAL KRISHNA DISTRICT 3. MOLA SAHIB SHAIK M D SARDAR, S/O. PENTU SAHIB R/O. ALINAGARAM, MANDAVALLI MANDAL KRISHNA DISTRICT 4. ABDUL SUBAN BAJAN, S/O ABDUL MUNAF R/O. ALINAGARAM, MANDAVALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT 5. MOHAMMAD RABIKA, S/O IBRAHIM KALEEL R/O. ALINAGARAM, MANDAVALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DIS 6. KOPPINENI PRABHAKAR, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC-PANCHAYAT SECRETARY,ALINAGARAM,MANDAVALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. R 6 IMPLEADED AS PER 2 COURT ORDER DATED 09/10/25, VIDE I.A NO-1/25 IN CC NO- 2087 OF 2021. ...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 punish the Respondents herein Under Section 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for willfully and intentionally disobeying the Order dated 20.08.2020 in W.P. No. 8564 of 2020 passed by this Hon'ble Court and to pass 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 permit me to implead the proposed party as Respondent No. 6 as necessary party in C.C No. 2087 of 2021 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K V ADITYA CHOWDARY Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. N SRIHARI 2. Y KOTESWARA RAO The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for the willful disobedience of the orders dated 20.08.2020 passed in W.P.No.8564 of 2020. 2. Heard Sri K.V.Aditya Chowdhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N.Sri Hari, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.6. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that when the Gram Panchayat failed to take action against the illegal construction being carried out by certain individuals in RS.No.558 who are party respondents to W.P.No.8564 of 2020, the said writ petition has been filed. This Court, by way of orders dated 20.08.2020 disposed of the said writ petition directing the authorities to deal with the objections filed by the petitioner and the resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat and take appropriate steps in accordance with law after giving notice and opportunity to petitioner as well as unofficial respondents in the said lis. Learned counsel further contended that despite such directions, no action has been initiated by the respondents or removed the encroachments by demolishing the structures in existence. The said action is willful and deliberate, as such, the authorities are liable to be punished under contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 4 4. On the other hand, Sri N.Sri Hari and Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned counsel for the respondents in one voice contended that having filed this contempt case, the petitioner also filed a writ petition vide W.P.No.37863 of 2022 for the very same relief, as sought in W.P.No.8564 of 2020 and with a consequential direction to punish the respondents for violating the orders passed in W.P.No.8564 of 2020, which is subject writ petition in the present contempt case. They further submitted that filing cases one after the other for the very same relief is nothing but abuse of process of law. Before filing W.P.Nos.8564 of 2020 and 37863 of 2022, the very same petitioner filed Writ Petition No.10121 of 2019 for the very same relief, however, by different counsel. They further contended that this Court has to look into the aspect of the conduct of the parties also while adjudicating the case. In the said circumstance, this contempt case is liable to be dismissed with heavy costs, accordingly, prayed to dismiss the contempt. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel. 6. This Court by way of orders dated 20.08.2020 passed the following order: “In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the 3rd respondent is directed to deal with the objections filed by the petitioner and the resolution dated 09.03.2011 and take appropriate action in accordance with law, after giving notice and opportunity to both the petitioner and the unofficial respondents.” 5 7. The present contempt case has been filed on the ground that the authorities have not dealt with the objections of the petitioners and thereby not demolished the structures/removed the encroachments in the land situated in RS.No.558 of Alinagaram Village. 8. The contention of the respondents is that in the year 2019, the petitioner herein filed a writ petition to declare the inaction of the respondents therein in not considering his representation made requesting them to stop the illegal construction being carried out in the Government land situated in RS.No.558 and this Court, on 09.09.2025, while disposing of the said writ petition directed the 5th respondent therein to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner with reference to the resolution dated 09.03.2011, within a period of two weeks. 9. Supressing the said fact, the petitioner filed another writ petition vide W.P.No.8564 of 2020 for the very same relief wherein this Court, on 20.08.2020, disposed of the same directing the respondents to deal with the objections and the resolution dated 09.03.2011 and take appropriate action in accordance with law. 10. Inasmuch as the orders in both the writ petitions are one and the same, the petitioner, having filed a contempt case, it is unclear how another writ petition came to be filed, and in the said writ petition the 6 relief is also sought to take action for the non-implementation of the orders of this Court in W.P. No. 8564 of 2020. 11. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the respondents the conduct of the parties should also be looked into while adjudicating the cases. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, despite the direction by this Court, the respondent authorities are not taking any action against the illegal constructions being carried out by the parties. There is some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that when a series of directions were given by this Court, the authorities are not taking steps. At the same time, this Court should not lose sight of the conduct of the parties as well. It is brought to the notice of this Court that Writ Petition No. 37863 of 2022 has been filed and the same is pending adjudication, and a perusal of the reliefs sought therein would also clearly indicate that a direction was also sought to take action against the respondents for violating the orders passed in W.P. No. 8564 of 2020. In the said view of the matter, this Contempt Case is liable to be dismissed. 12. Further, abuse of process of law is also found in the present case; however, instead of dismissing the contempt case with heavy costs, this Court, taking a lenient view, is inclined to dismiss the contempt case, 7 cautioning the parties to exercise with more diligence, however, the petitioner is at liberty to pursue his writ petition. 13. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 11th February, 2026 RKS