Andhra Pradesh High Court
CC/996/2022 of Sri.S.Maruthi, Vs Sri. K. Prabhakar Rao, on 24 June 2026
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.
Date of reserved for orders :
Date of pronouncement :
Date of uploading :
APHC010139832022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
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
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:
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 996 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 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.
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
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 996 OF 2022
Date: 25.06.2026 TM