Andhra Pradesh High Court
CC/559/2018 of Gurugubelli Madhusudhana Rao, Vs B. Koteswara Rao, on 6 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3206] SATURDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO CONTEMPT CASE NO: 559/2018 Between: 1. GURUGUBELLI MADHUSUDHANA RAO,, OCC CULTIVATION, RIO
APHC010155272018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
SATURDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 559/2018
Between:
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.
1. GURUGUBELLI MADHUSUDHANA RAO,, OCC CULTIVATION, RIO PILLALAVALASA VILLAGE, PONDUR MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
2. GURUGUBELLI SREERAM MURTHY, OCC CULTIVATION R/O PILLALAVALASA VILLAGE, PONDUR MANDAL SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
3. GURUGUBELLI DALI NAIDU., OCC
CULTIVATION
RIO
VILLAGE, PONDUR MANDAL SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT
...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. B KOTESWARA RAO, S/O. NOT KNOWN, WORKING AS DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER. SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT AT SRIKAKULAM
2. S V SUBRAHMANYAM, S/O. NOT KNOWN, WORKING AS MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, PONDURU MANDAL PRAJA PARISHAD, PONDURU VILLAGE, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
3. B KRISHNA MURTHY, S/O. NOT KNOWN, WORKING AS ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, 0/O MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PONDUR MANDAL PRAJA PARISHAD, PONDUR VILLAGE, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
4. G RAJEEV, S/O. NOT KNOWN, WORKING AS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY,
GRAM PANCHAYAT,
PILLALAVALASA VILLAGE, PONDURU MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM 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 punish the respondents for their willful disobedience of Order Di. 09.02.2016 passed in W.P No. 3922 of 2016 on the file of this Honble Court and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Contemnor(S):
1. The Court made the following ORDER:
The present contempt case has been filed on the ground of violation of order, dated 09.02.2016 in W.P.No.3922 of 2016. The main writ petition itself had been settled in Lok Adalat on 07.11.2020.
In that view of the matter, nothing further survives in this contempt case and accordingly, this Contempt Case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
Date: 07.03.2026 KA
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 559/2018 Date: 07.03.2026 KA