Andhra Pradesh High Court
CC/809/2022 of VANNALI SATYAVATHI Vs Sri. Srikesh B Lathkar, IAS on 2 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE 3rd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CONTEMPT CASE NO: 809 OF 2022 Between: 1. VANNALI SATYAVATHI, W/o Janardhana Rao, Aged about 40 years, Occ. Agriculture Labour, R/o
APHC010114952022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE 3rd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 809 OF 2022
Between:
1. VANNALI SATYAVATHI, W/o Janardhana Rao, Aged about 40 years, Occ. Agriculture Labour, R/o D.No. 1-25, SC Colony, Sankili Village, Regidi Amadalavalasa Mandal, Srikakulam District
...Petitioner
AND
1. Sri Srikesh B Lathkar IAS, S/o Not Known District Collector, Srikakulam District, Collectorate Complex, Srikakulam
2. T V S G Kumar, S/o Not known, Age not known Revenue Divisional Officer Palakonda Sub Division, Palakonda Srikakulam District
3. B Satyam, S/o Somulu, Aged about 55 years, Tahsildar, '
Regidi Amadalavalasa Mandal, Srikakulam District
4. M Savitramma, W/o Not known, Aged about 35 years, Panchayat Secretary Sanikili Gram Panchayat, Sankili Village, Regidi Amadalavalasa Mandal, Srikakulam District
...Respondents
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 may be pleased to punish the respondents No.1 to 4, under the Contempt of Court Act for willful and deliberate disobedience of the orders of the Honourable High Court .passed in W.P.No. 25643 of 2020 dated 25.08.2021 and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: TADDI NAGESWARA RAO
Counsel for the Respondents: KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI
Counsel for the Respondents:G L NAGESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents:KUMAR ETUKURI
The Court made the following order:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 809 OF 2022
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 Contempt Case is filed against the respondents for wilful disobedience of the order, dated 25.08.2021 passed by this Court in W.P.No.25643 of 2020.
2. On behalf of the respondents, a counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent No.3 wherein paragraph Nos.5 and 6 averred as under:
“5. However, in respectful compliance of the directions passed by the Hon’ble High Court on 25.08.2021 in W.P.No.25643/2020; this respondent could not take any further steps in the matter in view of the status quo orders are in operation. This respondent did not process the file in so far as it relates to issue of house site pattas to the weaker sections on the subject land and no pattas have been distributed ever since the status quo orders are in operation in connection with Sy.No.319 of Sankili Village, Regidi- Amadalavalasa Mandal, Srikakulam District.
6. It is submitted that this respondent respectfully submits that the petitioner contended that the respondents wilfully disobeyed the Status-Quo orders passed by the Hon’ble Court and in support of her contention the petitioner filed certain local news papers clippings. But in fact, the respondents did not distribute any pattas covered by subject lands ever since the Status-Quo orders were in operation and the matter published in the alleged local news paper clippings does not relate to the subject land and it is only related to other village by name Boddavalasa Village of Regidi-Amadalavalasa Mandal. As such the question of wilful disobedience or of having acted in gross violation of the orders of the Hon’ble High Court does not arise.”
3. The statement of the respondent No.3 that no pattas are distributed to anyone in view of the Status quo order passed by this Court, is placed on record.
4. In view of the same, in our considered view, no further adjudication is required in this case.
5. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed.
6. No order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the Contempt Case shall stand closed.
_____________________________
JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND Date: 03.09.2026 PKR
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
Date: 03.09.2026 PKR