Contempt case for non-implementation of an order directing disposal of the petitioner's appeal. The authority stated no appellate authority existed against the disciplinary order, so violation did not arise. The contemnor apologised and the contempt case was closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2222 OF 202a
Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971, praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to punish the respondent under the provisions of Contempt of courts Act 1971, for intentionally and willfully violating the order Dt 18 09 2022 passed in W.P. No. 29164 OF 2021, u/s 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act,’
Between:
...Petitioner
AND
...Contemnor
lA NO: 1 OF 2023
;n th 'bat in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into services as clerk in Co operative Urban Sank Ltd., Anantapuramu District, Anantapuramu pending C.C.
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri. M Chinnapa Reddy
Counsel for the Respondent: Sri Sazid Kallur
The Court made the following:
\
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.2222 OF 2023
ORDER;
The present contempt case is filed for non-implementation of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.29164 of 2021 dated 08.09.2022. Wherein, this Court directed the respondents to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner.
The concerned authority appeared before this Courtand stated that there is no such appellate authority againsttheorder of the disciplinary authority.
The contemnor tendered his apology to this Court. Asthere is no appellate authority, therefore, the violationoftheorderof this Court does not arise. Hence, the present ContemptCaseis
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pendinginthis
case shall stand closed.
//TRUE COPY//
S/d- M. RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR
1^^ ^ p^ECTION OFFICER
/
To,
4. THREE CD Copies
SGM
AL H
HIGH COURT
DATED: 05/01/2024
ORDER
CC.No.2222 of 2023
CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent wilfully violated the order dated 08.09.2022 in W.P.No.29164 of 2021 directing disposal of the petitioner's appeal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner (name illegible in record)
J.L. Murali
Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
