Andhra Pradesh High Court
CC/5450/2022 of B VENGAIAH Vs SRI G SAI PRASAD IAS on 14 April 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH CONTEMPT CASE NO: 5450/2022 Between: 1. B VENGAIAH, S/O LATE SUBBAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
APHC010631252022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 5450/2022
Between:
1. B VENGAIAH, S/O LATE SUBBAIAH AGED ABOUT 65
YEARS
OCC
EX
SERVICEMAN
R/O
BYRAVARAMVILLAGE DUTTALUR MANDAL SPSR
NELLORE DISTRICT A P
...PETITIONER
AND
1. SRI G SAI PRASAD IAS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT
2. SRI KVN CHAKRADHAR BABU I A S, DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT
3. SRI SEENU NAIK, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
KAVALI,
SPSR
NELLORE
DISTRICT
ANDHRA
PRADESH
4. SRI RAVINDRA BABU, THE TAHSILDAR, DUTTALUR
MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT ANDHRA
PRADESH
5. SRI SRINIVASULU, THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER,
BUDAWADA VILLAGE MARRIPADU MANDAL SPSR
NELLORE DISTRICT A P
6. SRI BAJI REDDY, THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
DUTTALUR
POLICE
STATION
SPSR
NELLORE
DISTRICT A P
7. THIRUPATAHIAH, S/O PENCHAIAH AGED ABOUT 45
YEARS
8. KOTESWARA RAO, S/O PENCHALAIAH AGED ABOUT
YEARS
R/O
BYRAVARAM
VILLAGE
DUTTALURMANDAL SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT A P
9. SREENIVASULTI, S/O PENCHALAIAH AGED ABOUT 40
YEARS
R/O
BYRAVARAM
VILLAGE
DUTTALURMANDAL SP SR NELLORE DISTRICT A P
10. KRISHNAIAH, S/O PENCHALAIAH AGED ABOUT 38
YEARS R/O BYRAVARAM VILLAGE DUTTALUR
MANDAL SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT A P
...CONTEMNOR(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SURESH KUMAR ROUTHU
Counsel for the Contemnor(S):
1. T M K CHAITANYA
2. T LAKSHMI NARAYANA
3. NARASIMHA REDDY. G . L
The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH
CONTEMPT CASE No.5450 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 for non-implementation of the orders dated 24.08.2022 passed by this Court in W.P.No.29183 of 2021.
2. While disposing of the writ petition, the respondent authorities are directed to conduct survey and fix boundaries of the subject land and take appropriate action. Till such time, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioner and not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner.
3. After notice, the 4th respondent has filed a counter. Along with the counter, he has also placed the endorsement issued on 01.12.2022 and also recording the statement and panchanama while issuing such proceedings.
4. Though learned counsel for the petitioner disputed about the proceedings, he contended that without proper enquiry, survey and without fixing the boundaries, the respondents have issued the present proceedings. He further contended that the proceedings have been issued after a lapse of three months, whereas the writ petition was disposed of directing to conduct survey within one month.
5. Considering the submissions and on perusal of the record, though there are some laches on the part of the respondents, the fact remains that the respondents have conducted a survey and issued proceedings on 01.12.2022. If the petitioner has any grievance about the said proceedings, he has a statutory remedy by way of an appeal under Section 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 ( for short, ‘the Act’). In the said circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that there is no willful disobedience or violation of the orders of this Court.
6. Hence, the Contempt Case is closed granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 11 of the Act. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH
Date: 15.04.2026 Ivd
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH
CONTEMPT CASE No.5450 of 2022
Dated: 15.04.2026
Ivd