Andhra Pradesh High Court
CC/4814/2023 of YERESI PULLAREDDY Vs SRI GOPAL KRISHNA DWIVEDI I.A.S. on 5 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3207] FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CONTEMPT CASE NO: 4814/2023 Between: 1. YERESI PULLAREDDY, S/O. Y. GANGI REDDY HINDU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
APHC010391742023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 4814/2023
Between:
1. YERESI PULLAREDDY, S/O. Y. GANGI REDDY HINDU, AGED
ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR R/O. H.NO.4-62, PULIPADU
VILLAGE,
MUNDLAMURU
MANDAL
PRAKASAM
DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH
...PETITIONER
AND
1. SRI GOPAL KRISHNA DWIVEDI I A S, FATHER'S NAME NOT
KNOWN
TO
THE
PETITIONER
PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY
PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT
SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 522238.
2. SRI SHAMSHER SINGH RAWAT I A S, FATHER'S NAME NOT
KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FINANCE
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR
DISTRICT. 522238.
3. SRI KONA SRIDHAR I A S, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONER THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL
WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT TADEPALLI
GUNTUR DISTRICT. 522501.
4. SRI A S DINESH KUMAR, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONER THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PRAKASAM DISTRICT, AT ONGOLE. 523002.
5. SRI G NARAYANA REDDY, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONER DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER PRAKASAM
DISTRICT ONGOLE. 523001
6. SRI K KUSUMA KUMARI, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONER MANDAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MUNDLAMURU
MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 523265.
7. SRI J RAJARAJESWARI, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONER PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, PULIPADU VILLAGE AND
GRAMAPANCHAYAT.
MUNDLAMURU
MANDAL,PRAKASAM
DISTRICRT. 523247.
8. SRI J HARI RAMA KRISHNA, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONER THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PANCHAYAT RAJ
INSTITUTION DIVISION ONGOLE PRAKASAM 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 herein under the provisions of Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Court Act read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India for willful and deliberate violation of the Orders dated 30- 09-2022 made in W.P.No. 31202 of 2022 of this Hon'ble Court in the interest of Justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased May be pleased to dispense with the personal appearance of the 4th respondent in CC.No.4814 of 2023 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. NUVVULA RAM BABU
Counsel for the Contemnor(S):
1. RAMA RAO KOCHIRI
2. KIRAN KUMAR VADLAMUDI
3. OMKAR D
4. .
The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
CONTEMPT CASE No.4814 of 2023
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 the wilful disobedience of the order dated 30.09.2022 in W.P.No.31202 of 2022 passed by this Court.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that the order of the Court is complied with.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also endorsed the same, but would submit that the order of the Court is not complied with within the time stipulated by the Court and, as such, the compliance is not in the true letter and spirit.
5. On careful perusal of the record, it reveals that admittedly there is delay in implementing the order of the Court in its true letter and spirit within time stipulated by the Court. In fact, this Court number of times advised the respondents to be more careful and conscious in implementing the orders of the Court within the time stipulated. However, it appears that there is no change in the attitude of the officers. In the present case also admittedly there is delay. When this Court asked the respondents who are present before this
Court about the delay occurred in implementing the orders of the Court, they tendered their unconditional apology.
6. Taking into consideration of the unconditional apology tendered by them as bonafide, this Court intends to take lenient view against them in this contempt case to meet the ends of justice.
7. Accordingly, this Contempt Case is closed.
8. It is made it clear that the respondents shall be more careful and vigilant in implementing the orders of this Court in its true letter and spirit in future.
9. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND Date: 06.03.2026 JLV
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
CONTEMPT CASE No.4814 of 2023
Dt.06.03.2026 JLV