1 APHC010033822026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 409/2026 Between: 1. KATAMALLA POUL, S/O. DEVASAHAYAM, AGED 59 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, RIO. NARAYANAPALLE(V), .ARDHAVEEDU(M), PRAKASAM DISTRICT(PRESENTLY MARKAPURAM DIST.,) ...PETITIONER AND 1. SRI ABU THALEEM SUPTD ENGINEER, SUPDT ENGINEER(I CAD), ONGOLE,...PRAKASAMDISTRICT . 0 2. SRI RAJA BABU I A S, . COLLECTOR DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRI. I/C OF MARKAPURAM 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 commit the Contemnor / Respondents to this Honble Court on their willful disobedience and negligence in implementing the orders dt. 18.08.25 of this Honble Court passed- in W.P.No.7807/23 showing their contumacious act and consequently punish the Contemnor/Respondents on their willful disobedience and negligence in implementing the orders dt. 18.08.25 of this Honble Court passed in W.P.No.7807/23 as per section 10 to 12 of the 5 Contempt of Courts Act forthwith and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 2 1. SRINIVASULU KURRA Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. SOMA RAJU YELISETTI The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for willful, wanton and deliberate disobedience in implementation of the order passed by this Court on 18.08.2025 in W.P.No.7807 of 2023. 2. The petitioner has filed the aforesaid writ petition aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not considering the representation dated 10.10.2022 for implementing the orders in W.P.No.7058 of 2019 passed by this Court. This Court, on 18.08.2025, passed the following order: “…instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondents to restore the stream, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four (4) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 3. Heard Mr. Srinivasulu Kurra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Soma Raju Y, learned counsel for the contemnors. 4. Today when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for the contemnors has produced a copy of instruction of the Superintending Engineer, Construction circle, Ongole bearing Lr.No.SE/CC(P)/OGL/DEE1/AEE3/TS-170-Court Cases/Vol.8/293M, dated 19.06.2026 wherein it is stated that the formed revetment bund across Rallvagu (Stream 2) was removed to a width of about 25 feet across the alignment of the stream before 17.06.2026. In proof of the said submissions, 4 learned counsel has filed photographs, which fact was not denied by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. In view of the fact that the orders passed by this Court on 18.08.2025 have been complied with by the contemnors, the contempt case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 19.06.2026 Gss