APHC010583612024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 4746/2024 Between: 1. KANDUKURI SATYANARAYANA, S/O.LATE POTTIYYA, MALE, AGED 60 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. SEETHANAGARAM VILLAGE, CHINTHALAPUDI MANDAL, W.G DIST., A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1. G RANGA RAO, Deputy Inspector of Survey, Nuzvid, Eluru District. A.P. (3rd Respondent in W.P.No. 12041 of 2024). ...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 issue the summons to the Respondent / R3 and punish him for Contempt of the Honourable Court orders in W.P.No.12041/2024, dated 19.06.2024 passed by the Honble Sri Justice Subba Reddy Satti by willful disobedience and complied the above said orders and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K J V N PUNDAREEKAKSHUDU Counsel for the Contemnor: p. 2 1. K M KRISHNA REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER Heard Sri K.J.V.N.Pundareekakshudu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.M.Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The above contempt case was filed complaining about the violation of the order dated 19.06.2024 in W.P.No.12041 of 2024. 2. Petitioner filed the aforementioned writ petition complaining that the appeal filed by him under Section 11(1) and 12(a) of the Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923, on the file of Deputy Inspector of Survey, Eluru, West Godavari District, was not disposed of. 3. The writ petition was disposed of, and the operative portion of the order reads thus: “4. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, since there is no dispute regarding pendency of appeal filed by the petitioner on the file of the Deputy Inspector of Survey, Nuzvid, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, with the consent of both the counsels, directing the learned Deputy Inspector of Survey, Nuzvid to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner as per law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order by. Learned 3rd respondent adheres to the procedure prescribed under Law, and pass orders in accordance with law.” p. 3 4. The contempt case was filed on 20.12.2024. In the affidavit filed in support of the contempt case, it was pleaded that the respondent failed to comply with the order and thus was liable to be punished under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. 5. Sri K.M.Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent, submitted the Action Taken Report dated 12.09.2024 by the respondent along with FMB. A perusal of the same would disclose that, in pursuance of the order in the writ petition, the respondent issued notice dated 24.07.2024 and thereafter visited the field and identified an extent of Ac.1.80 cents of land in R.S.No.30. The map filed along with the report also reveals the same. 6. Section 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 deals with an appeal against the order under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act. It is apt to extract Section 11 to deal with the issue. 11. Appeals against orders under Section 9 or 10 – (1) Any person affected by a decision under Section 9 or 10 may appeal to the prescribed officer. The decision of the appellate authority with reasons therefor shall be recorded in writing and notice of such decision shall be given in the prescribed manner to the appeal. Any modification of the survey officers decision, ordered by the appellate authority, shall be noted in the record prepared under Section 9 or 10 as the case may be. (2) A copy of the order and a copy of the map of recording the boundaries as determined under Section 9, 10 or 11 (1) shall be furnished to any person interested in such order or map as the case may be on his application and at his cost. Page 4 of 4 7. A perusal of the section extracted supra, coupled with the Action Taken Report, would indicate that the respondent authority visited the land and conducted a survey, and hence, this Court is of the considered opinion that the respondent had complied with the order dated 19.06.2024 in W.P.No.12041 of 2024. This Court does not find any violation of the order passed by this Court. 8. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is Dismissed. No costs. This order will not preclude the petitioner from challenging the Action Taken Report filed by the respondent if the petitioner is still aggrieved. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI PVD