APHC010718452025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 4257/2025 Between: 1. BURI NAGAMANI, W/O SANKARA RAO AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O 0-00, JOGULADUMMA VILLAGE, JIYYAMMAVALASA MANDAL VIZINAGARAM, ANDHRA PRADESH- 535526. ...PETITIONER AND 1. KORADA RAMACHANDRA RAO, Project Director, D.W.M.A., Parvathipuram Manyam. ...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 DECLARE that, the official respondents have willfully and deliberately violated the order of this Hon'ble Court Order Dt. 04.02.2025 in W.P. No. 2625 OF 2025 and punish them for the offence of CONTEMPT under the provisions of Sec. 10 to 12 of Contempt Courts Act, 1971 read with rules made thereunder in the interest of Justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P RAJASEKHAR p. 2 Counsel for the Contemnor: 1. SPL C FOR NREGS(M S R CHANDRA MURTHY) The Court made the following: ORDER The above contempt case is filed complaining non violation of order dated 04.02.2025 in W.P.No.2625 of 2025. 2. The petitioner filed the aforementioned writ petition impugning the proceedings vide Rc.No.433/2024/H.R.M.S, dated 22.01.2025 issued by the District Coordinator, MGNREG Scheme, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. The writ petition was allowed on 04.02.2025 and the operative portion of the order reads thus: “13. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings impugned vide Rc.No.433/2024/H.R.M.C, dated 22.01.2025 (Ex.P6) are set aside. The matter is remitted to the 4th respondent. The learned 4th respondent shall issue notices to the petitioner fixing the date of hearing. The petitioner shall appear personally and submit an explanation if any. Upon considering the explanation and hearing of the petitioner, the learned 4th respondent shall pass orders by assigning reasons by following the timelines fixed in Field Assistant Human Resource Policy.” 4. In the affidavit filed in support of contempt case, it was pleaded that the respondents violated the order in the writ petition. 5. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned standing counsel submitted the proceedings vide Rc.No.433/2024/H.R.M.S, dated 07.02.2026. Copy of the order is passed on to the learned counsel for the petitioner across the bar. p. 3 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that the petitioner received the copy of the order. 7. As seen from the proceedings dated 07.02.2026, after the matter was remanded to the authority, the respondent-authority passed order afresh on 07.02.2026. 8. Given the proceedings vide Rc.No.433/2024/H.R.M.S, dated 07.02.2026, this Court does not find any violation of order dated 04.02.2025 in W.P.No.2625 of 2025. 9. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is Dismissed. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI PVD