Andhra Pradesh High Court
CC/317/2017 of K.Anjinappa, Vs Mr.D.Venkateswarlu, on 11 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 317/2017 Between: 1. K.ANJINAPPA,, S/O. K.DODAGATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC:
APHC010206542017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 317/2017
Between:
1. K.ANJINAPPA,, S/O. K.DODAGATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 26
YEARS, OCC: FIELD ASSISTANT, R/O.H.NO.3-143, GOLLAPALLI, PARIGI
MNADAL,
ANANTHAPUR
DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. MR D VENKATESWARLU, S/o.Not known to the petitioner, Aged about 50 years, Occ:The Project Director, DWMA, Ananthapur, Ananthapur District, Andhra Pradesh.
...CONTEMNOR
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 Punish the respondent herein for contempt of Court for the willful disobedience of this Hon'ble Court order dt.05-01-2017 in W.P.N0.5734/2015, of his Lordship Hon'ble Justice Sri M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO, by declaring the action of the respondent herein in not taking any steps for implementing this
NJS,J
C.C.NO.317 OF 2017
Hon'ble Court orders, for payment of back wages, as willful disobedience of the court orders, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SUDARSHAN REDDY DUDDUGUNTA
Counsel for the Contemnor:
1. SPL C FOR NREGS(M S R CHANDRA MURTHY)
The Court made the following:
NJS,J
C.C.NO.317 OF 2017
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:
There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.
2. The present contempt case is filed alleging non-compliance with the order dated 05.01.2017 in W.P.No.5734 of 2015. While disposing of the said writ petition, a direction was issued to the 2nd respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service. It was also observed that the 2nd respondent shall pass a reasoned order after giving an opportunity to the petitioner.
3. Pursuant to the same, vide proceedings dated 23.02.2017 of the Project Director, DWMA, Anathapur, (a copy of which is placed on record), the petitioner was reinstated into service.
4. In view of the above circumstances, the cause does not survive for adjudication in the present contempt case. Hence, the contempt case is closed. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date:12.03.2026 LSP