Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4216 (AP)

Sri.S.Maruthi, v. Sri. K. Prabhakar Rao,

CC/996/2022 · 2026-06-24

Battu Devanand

Original Suitbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : Date of uploading : APHC010139832022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3207] THURSDAY, THE 25th DAY OF JUNE 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CONTEMPT CASE NO: 996/2022 Between: 1. SRI.S.MARUTHI,, S/O.S.KANAKAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.67-2, 3' WARD, KOWTHALAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT - 518 349 ...PETITIONER AND 1. SRI K PRABHAKAR RAO, DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, KURNOOL DISTRICT 2. SRI SURYANARAYANA, PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, KOWTHALAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, KOWTHALAM MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 3. SRI MANDULA MAHANANDI, S/O. M. TAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, WARD MEMBER, R/O.3RD WARD, KOWTHALAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 4. SRI M TAYAPPA, S/O. NARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O.3/71 AND 3/72B, KOWTHALAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KURNOOL 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 take cognizance of the offence committed by the Respondents in disregarding the order passed by this Hon'ble Court on 2 23.6.2021 in W.P.No.11720/2021 under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act and punish them suitably and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SODUM ANVESHA Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. K RAJANNA 2. 3. V VINOD K REDDY (SC FOR ZP MPDO GP) The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CONTEMPT CASE NO: 996 OF 2022 ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed complaining willful disobedience of the respondents in implementing the order of this Court, dated 23.06.2021 in I.A.No.01 of 2021 in W.P.No.11720 of 2021. 2. Mr Rama Rao Kochiri, learned counsel for the 1st respondent Mr V.Vinod K.Reddy, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and Mr K.Rajanna, learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.3 and 4, would submit that against the final order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.11720 of 2021, W.A.No.515 of 2022 was filed and the same was disposed of by the Division Bench of this Court vide order, dated 30.01.2023 modifying the order of the learned Single Judge. In view of the same, they submit that nothing survives in this Contempt Case for further adjudication. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also endorsed the same. 4. In view of the above factual position, no further adjudication is required in this Contempt Case. 5. Accordingly, this Contempt Case is closed. 4 6. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the Contempt Case shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND 25.06.2026 Whether the order is: Speaking Reasoned Reportable Non-reportable TM 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CONTEMPT CASE NO: 996 OF 2022 Date: 25.06.2026 TM 6 7