Kuruva Lingamaiah v. G Sai Prasad,I.a.S
Case brief
What is this about?
In this contempt case, the petitioner sought punishment against respondents for alleged non-compliance with a court order dated 06.05.2022. Appearing on behalf of respondents, it was stated that the matter had already been complied with pursuant to an office endorsement dated 25.06.2022.
What did the court decide?
Contempt case closed with liberty to petitioner to challenge the Office Endorsement dated 25.06.2022. Costs not awarded.
What the court decided
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
CONTEMPT CASE No.1457 of 2023
ORDER :
This present Contempt Case came to be filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, seeking the following relief:
“…to punish the respondent Nos.1 to 4 under the Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act for the violation of the Order dated 06.05.2022 in W.P.No.14028 of 2022…”
- The present contempt case is filed challenging the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.14028 of 2022, wherein, the Court has directed the respondent authorities to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 27.11.2020, in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
- The 2nd respondent has filed a counter stating that the application filed by the petitioner through Meeseva dated 27.11.2020 for mutation and title deed cum e-pass book for the said land was disposed of by the then Tahsildar, Bandi Atmakur on 08.01.2021 as rejected basing on the webland status report of the Tahsildar login.
- Thereafter, in pursuance of the interim orders granted by this Court, speaking orders were passed vide this Office Endorsement No.Rc.B54/2022, dated 25.06.2022 which was also sent to the petitioner through Registered Post. It appears that there is some delay in compliance with the orders. But, however, the orders have already been complied.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent authorities violated the court order dated 06.05.2022 by failing to dispose of the petitioner's representation within the stipulated time.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioner
- respondent
Respondents 1 to 4
Coram
V. Sujatha
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Andhra Pradesh HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- CC/1457/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court