CC/1947/2025 of G. PRABHAKAR MURTHY Vs BABU A, IAS on 2 July 2026

1. G. PRABHAKAR RETIRED DEPUTY ARKAS MEADOWS, O NEAR RAMALAYAM T

1. BABU A, IAS, THE C AGE ABOUT 55 YEA OFFICE AT DOOR N ROAD, KUNCHANPA

2. SRI PEEYUSH KU AGE ABOUT 55 YEAR II) DEPARTMENT, A DISTRICT.

3. SRI T SESHADRI, JO ABOUT

YE DHENDAYALPURAM VISAKHAPATNAM.

03-07-2026 09-07-2026 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) Y, THE 3rd DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURY & E SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDA EMPT CASE No: 1947 of 2025 MURTHY, S/o.LATE G.VENKATE COMMISSIONER(ST), DOOR No. OLD PANCHAYAT OFFICE ROAD, GU TEMPLE, VIJAYAWADA (URBAN). ...PE AND CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE T ARS, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIA NO.12-468/4, ADJACENT TO NH-16, LLY, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. PIN 522 UMAR, IAS, SPECIAL CHIEF SEC RS, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, REVEN A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, OINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TA EARS,

VISAKHAPATNAM , CHINAGADILI, NEAR QI H

YA AVA ESWARLU, 51-5-3-6, UNADALA, TITIONER TAX, A.P., AL TAXES, SERVICE 2 501. CRETARY, NUE (VIG- GUNTUR AX, AGED DIVISION, HOSPITAL,

4. SRI K RAVI SHANKAR, SECRETARY TO CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, A.P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OFFICE AT DOOR NO. 12-468/4, ADJACENT TO NH-16, SERVICE ROAD, KUNCHANPALLY, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. PIN 522 501.

...CONTEMNOR(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. Mr.J.N VENKATA SURESH KUMAR Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

1. Mr.G RAJU

The Court made the following order: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya)

The present Contempt Case is filed alleging willful and deliberate disobedience of the orders dated 15.10.2024 in W.A.No.729 of 2024. While partly allowing the writ appeal, learned Division Bench remitted the matter back to the Disciplinary / Competent Authority for consideration of reply to be submitted by respondent / writ petitioner and passing of necessary orders therein, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of reply to the second show cause notice. Time was granted to the respondent / writ petitioner to submit reply within three weeks from the date of order and in the event, no reply to the second show cause notice is submitted within three weeks from the date of the order, it is left open to the Disciplinary / Competent Authority to pass appropriate orders basing on the facts and circumstances of the case and strictly in accordance with Law.

2. Learned arguing counsel for the petitioner Mr.G.Venkateswarlu appearing through online inter alia submits that the petitioner submitted Reply to the Show Cause Notice on 25.10.2024 itself, which was received by the 2nd respondent on 29.10.2024, that though six weeks time granted by the Court was expired on 13.10.2024, no orders are passed. He submits that in the said circumstances and after addressing a Letter dated 09.01.2025, the petitioner was constrained to file the present Contempt Case. He submits that the petitioner was deprived of his legitimate pensionary benefits in view of the delay caused and further that even though it is represented that the orders of the Court have been complied with, in view of the delay, the petitioner is entitled for costs.

3. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader made submissions with reference to the reply-affidavit filed by respondent No.2. He sought to impress upon the Court that the delay was due to administrative exigencies and for the reasons stated in Para Nos.4 and 5 of the reply-affidavit, the relevant portion of which reads as follows:

“5. On receipt of report from the CCST, the file has been sent to A.P. Vigilance Commission for advise and obtained orders in circulation. Accordingly, as per scheme of vigilance, in obedience to the orders of the Hon’ble High Court in W.A.No.729 of 2025 with letter and spirit and issued revised show-cause Notice vide Govt.Memo dated 15.07.2025. The petitioner has submitted his explanation dt.04.08.2025.

6. After examination of the explanation, Government, after following due procedure as per the Business Rules, have concluded the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and issued orders imposing “penalty of withholding of 10% monthly pension for a period of 10 years besides recovery of an amount of Rs.52,57,450/-” vide G.O.Rt.No.936, Revenue (Vig-VI) Department, dt.26.08.2025. Hence the delay caused is only due to processing as per the scheme of vigilance and as per the Government Business Rules and also due to certain changes in administrative hierarchy. There is no intentional or willful delay in concluding the disciplinary proceedings against the Charged Officer.”

4. Considering the above reasons stated in the affidavit and in view of tendering unconditional apologies by the respondent No.2 for the delay, this Court is satisfied that there is no willful disobedience of the orders and no case is made out to proceed further against the respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act.

5. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications if any, pending shall stand closed.

___________________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

_______________________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

Date: 03.07.2026 BLV

Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

C.C.No: 1947 of 2025

Dated: 03.07.2026 BLV