APHC010639492023 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: 55 OF 2024 Between: 1. VADDE NAGAMMA, W/O NAGANNA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O GANI VILLAGE, GADIVEMULA MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT, NANDYAL, ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER AND 1. RAHUL KUMAR REDDY, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER. THE JOINT COLLECTOR CUM LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NANDYAL DISTRICT, NANDYAL, ANDHRA PRADESH 2. SRI A SRINIVAS, S/O A.LAKSHMI NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NANDYAL REVENUE DIVISION, NANDYAL, ANDHRA PRADESH ...CONTEMNOR(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A SRINATH Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. S SRAVANA SANDHYA The Court made the following order: Heard Sri A. Srinath, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. S.Sravana Sandhya, learned counsel for the respondents. 2 SRS, J C.C.No.55 of 2024 2. The above contempt case was filed complaining about the violation of the order dated 06.09.2023 in W.P.No.1462 of 2021. 3. The petitioner filed the aforementioned writ petition assailing the proceedings issued by the RDO, Nandyal dated 26.04.2018, rejecting the claim of the petitioner to pay compensation. 4. The said writ petition was disposed of on 06.09.2023, and the operative portion is read as follows: “11. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and respondent Nos.3 and 4 shall pay compensation to the petitioner in respect of land resumed (assigned to petitioner as per the pattas referred to supra) situated at Gani Village, Gadivemula Mandal, Kurnool District, as per LAO-cum- Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division and other V. Mekala Pandu and others case, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.” 5. In the affidavit filed in support of the contempt case, it was specifically pleaded that the respondents have failed to comply with the order. 6. Pending the contempt case, the respondents paid the compensation to the petitioner as determined by the respondents therein. They also paid the compensation to other persons as stipulated in the petitioner’s order. Though there was some delay in paying the compensation, the amounts were paid to the petitioner. 3 SRS, J C.C.No.55 of 2024 7. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any violation of the order dated 06.09.2023 in W.P.No.1462 of 2021. [ 8. Accordingly, the contempt case is dismissed. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 29.01.2026 BSK 4 SRS, J C.C.No.55 of 2024 199 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 55 OF 2024 Date: 29.01.2026 BSK