Telangana High Court
CC/937/2013 of D.Rajeswar Reddy Vs Sri.Heera Naik, on 29 December 2023
COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENry NINTH DAY OFDECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE K. SARATH CONTEMPT CASE NO: 937 OF 2013 ln W.P.No.6808 of 2O13 Contempt Case filed Under Sections 1O to 12 of Conternpt of Courts Act to punish
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY,THE TWENry NINTH DAY OFDECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENW THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE K. SARATH
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 937 OF 2013lnW.P.No.6808 of 2O13
Contempt Case filed Under Sections 1O to 12 of Conternpt of Courts Act topunish the respondents herein for wilful and deliberate disobedience of the Orders ofthe High Court dated 07-03-2013 in WPMP No.8519/2023 W.P. No. 6808 of 2013Between:
D.Rajeswar Reddy, S/o Late Laxma Reddy, Aged about 5B years, Occ. RetiredGovernment Servant, R/o H.No.1-36, Bacharam, Hyathnagar Mandal, Ranga ReddyDistrict. ...PETITIONERAND
1. Sri.Heera Naik, Bacharam Gram Panchayat, Rep.by its The Mandal ExecutiveOfficer and Special Officer Bacharam Village, Hyathnagar Mandal. RangaReddy DistrictOfficer and Special Officer Bacharam Village, Hyathnagar Mandal. RangaReddy District
2. Sri.Anantha Raj Reddy, The Panchayat Secretary Grampanchayat BacharamHayatnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.Hayatnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
3. Sri.Aruna, The Mandal Parishad Development Officer Hyathnagar Mandal,Ranga Reddy District.Ranga Reddy District.
4. Sri.B.Ramesh Goud, S/o Ydagiri, Aged about 32 [years, ]Occ: Ex. SarpanchFi/o H.No.2-75, Bacharam (V) Hyathnagar Mandal Ranga Reddy DistrictFi/o H.No.2-75, Bacharam (V) Hyathnagar Mandal Ranga Reddy District
...RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. G. JYOTHI KIRAN
Counsel for the Respondent Nos 2 TO 3: SRI KISHORE RAO PUSKURU [(SC]FOR TS ZILLA PARISHADS)
The Court made the following ORDER:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE [K.SARATH]CONTEMPT CASE No. 937 of [2OL3]
tnW.P.No.68O8 of 2O13
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This Court passed interim orders [on ][07.03.2013]directing the respondent [No. ][1-Gram ][Panchayat ][to]dispose of the representation [filed ][by ][the ][petitioner]within a period of hfteen (15) days [from the ][date ][of]receipt of copy of that order. As the [respondent ][No.1]has not complied with the orders [passed ][by ][this ][Court,]the present contempt case has been [frled. ][Even after]completion of ten (10) years, no counter [is ][hled ][by ][the]respondents and the learned counsel for [the petitioner]is unable to get instructions whether the cause in [the]contempt case survives or [not.]
I
\
2
2. Recording the a_forementioned submission, this contempt case is closed. There shall be no order as tocosts.
3Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall standclosed.closed.
SD/- CH.VENKATESWARLUOEPUTY REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPYII
SECTION OFFICER
To1. OneCCto SRl. G. JYOTHI KIRAN, [Advocate ][OPUC]1. OneCCto SRl. G. JYOTHI KIRAN, [Advocate ][OPUC]
2. One CC to SRl. KISHORE RAO [PUSKURU SC FOR TS ][ZILLA ][PARISHADS]IoPUCIIoPUCI3. Two CD Copies NS
s
HIGH COURT
DATED:291'1212O23
ORDERCC.No.937 ot 2013lnWP.No.6808 of 2013
CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE
W
HS( tl(J[q]22t'lAB 2ii?ia'-t o€sPATCEO