Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Kumba Balamuragaiah Vs Sri.Peeyush Kumar, IAS — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

Home
Andhra Pradesh HC
2025
Kumba Balamuragaiah Vs Sri.Peeyush Kumar, IASKumba Balamuragaiah v. Sri.Peeyush Kumar, IAS

Dismissed¶¶70

Kumba Balamuragaiah v. Sri.Peeyush Kumar, IAS

Andhra Pradesh HC25 Dec 2025CC/1222/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), Contempt Case No.1222 of 2025, decided 26.12.2025 by Justice Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad. Thirty-three residents of Chintalapalem village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District sought punishment of State officials — the Principal Secretary (Finance and Planning), the Special Chief Secretary, Water Resources Department, the Chief Engineer, Telugu Ganga Project, the Special Collector (L.A.) and the Special Deputy Collector (L.A.), Telugu Ganga Project — for willful disobedience of the order dated 06.01.2025 in W.P.No.14602 of 2024. Compliance by payment was recorded; the unrecorded claim for interest during the pendency of the writ petition was left open to be raised before the appropriate forum; contempt case dismissed, no costs. Keywords: Contempt of Courts Act 1971 Sections 10-12; Section 151 CPC; Telugu Ganga Project; land acquisition; compliance of writ order; interest pending disposal of writ petition.

What did the court decide?

No punishment imposed on the Respondents; the Petitioners were granted liberty to raise their claim for interest before the appropriate Forum in accordance with law; no order as to costs; interlocutory applications, if any, stand closed. ¶¶70

Why is it important?

The Court held that the order dated 06.01.2025 in W.P.No.14602 of 2024 has been complied with by the Respondents, payments having been made to the Petitioners. ¶¶69

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No punishment imposed on the Respondents; the Petitioners were granted liberty to raise their claim for interest before the appropriate Forum in accordance with law; no order as to costs; interlocutory applications, if any, stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Respondents/Contemnors willfully and wantonly disobeyed the orders of this Court dated 06.01.2025 in W.P.No.14602 of 2024 so as to be punishable under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. +2 more

Court's answer

Since the order stood complied with, the Contempt Case was dismissed, with no order as to costs, and interlocutory applications, if any, stand closed in terms of the Order.

Ratio / Principle

The Court held that the order dated 06.01.2025 in W.P.No.14602 of 2024 has been complied with by the Respondents, payments having been made to the Petitioners.

Key takeaways

In so far as the claim for interest pending disposal of the Writ Petition is concerned, the Petitioners are at liberty to raise that claim before the appropriate Forum, in accordance with law.ratio¶¶69

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Ss. 10 to 12 — alleged willful, wanton disobedience of the High Court's order dated 06.01.2025 in W.P.No.14602 of 2024 — Respondents' counsel submitted that the order had been complied with by making the payments to the Petitioners — Petitioners' counsel pointed out that their prayer for interest pending disposal of the Writ Petition had not been recorded in the said order — Held: recording that the order stood complied with, the Court held that, in so far as interest is concerned, the Petitioners are at liberty to raise the claim before the appropriate Forum in accordance with law — Contempt Case dismissed, with no order as to costs — Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed.

A

1

[3328]

APHC010228622025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1222/2025

Between:

KUMBA BALAMURAGAIAH, S/O GANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS

KUMBA SANTAMMA,, W/O MURAGAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

PUJARI VANAMMA,, W/O PEDAKRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

PUJARI PEDA KRISHNALAH ,, S/O RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

KUMBA PADMAMMA,, W/O SUBRAMANYAM LATE AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

GURRAM SUBBARAJU,, S/O CHINA VENKATA SUBBAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

GURRAM SUBHASHINI,, W/O SUBBRAJU AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.

JAVADI PADMAMMA,, W/O MURAGAIAH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

PAGALI RAMANAMMA,, W/O ANJANEYULU AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

KOLLETI VEERAIAH,, S/O BAKKAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

GUNISETTY VENKATA LAKSHMI,, W/O BALA SUBRAMANYAM AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

2

KUMBA RAJAMMA,, W/O MURRAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.

KUMBA SUBRAMANYAM,, S/O VENKATAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

KUMBA MURAGAIAH,, S/O VENKATAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,

KUMBA ANKAMMA,, W/O VENKATAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,

KUMBA BALA MURAGAIAH,, S/O GANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

BHEEMAVARAN SUMAN,, S/O PENCHALAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

BHEEMAVARAN VENKATESU,, S/O RAMANALAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

BHEEMAVARAN PENCHALAIAH,, S/O RAMANAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.

CHINTA VENKATARATHNAM,, S/O LATE SEENAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

BHEEMAVARAM SUSEELAMMA,, W/O PENCHALAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS

NALLAPALYAM SATHISH,, S/O CHEERALALAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.

DAMERA RATHNAMMA,, W/O GOPAL NAIDU AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

GURAM VENKATESU,, S/O CHINA VENKATA SUBBAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

DAMERA RAGHAVULU NAIDU,, S/O VEERA SWAMY NAIDU AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS.

CHINTA JAYAMMA,, W/O BODAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.

GURRAM CHANDRAKALA,, W/O SOMAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

GURRAM VENKATAMMA,, W/O GOPAL AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

GURRAM RAJESWARAMMA,, W/O SIDDAIAH AGED ABOUT 48

3

YEARS,

CHINTA RANGAMMA,, W/O KRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

CHINTA RAMANAMMA,, W/O SUBRAMANYAM AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

CHINTA PADMAMMA., W/O VENKATASUBBALAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS

GURRAM VENKATA RAMANAIAH,, S/O PENCHALAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT CHINTALAPALEM VILLAGE, YERPEDU MANDAL,CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

SRI PEEYUSH KUMAR IAS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS,VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

SRI G SAI PRASAD IAS, REP BY SPECIAL CHIEF SECRATARY WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT AP SECRETARIAT AMARAVATI VELAGAPUDI GUNTUR DISTRICT

SRI B VARA PRASAD, THE CHIEF ENGINEER TELUGU GANGA PROJECT, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

SRI HUSSAIN SAHEB, SPECIAL COLLECTOR L.A, TELUGU GANGA PROJECT, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

SRI B MAHESWARA REDDY, SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR L.A TELUGU GANGA PROJECT, RAPUR, SPSR NELLORE 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 under Sec.10 to 12 of Contempt of Court Act, 1971 for willful, wanton, disobedience of the orders of this Honble High Court dated.06.01.2025 passed in W.P.No.14602 of 2024 by the Honble Lordships and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

4

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 Pleased to dispense with filling of the certified copies of orders dated dated.06.01.2025 passed in W.P.No.14602 of 2024 and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1.VALLEPU JAGADEESH

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

1.SUSHMA YAGANTI

The Court made the following:

5

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1222 OF 2025

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri Vallepu Jagadeesh, learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Ms. P. Usha, learned Counsel representing Ms. Sushma Yaganti, Learned Counsel for the Respondents.

Ms. P. Usha, learned Counsel representing Ms. Sushma Yaganti, learned Counsel for the Respondents submits that the Order of this Court has been complied with by making the payments to the Petitioners.

Sri Vallepu Jagadeesh, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners would submit that the Petitioners have also prayed for payment of interest pending disposal of the Writ Petition. However, the same has not been recorded in the Order of this Court dated 06.01.2025.

Having so recorded the same, this Court is of the view that the Order of this Court has been complied with by the Respondents. In so far as the interest is concerned, the Petitioners herein are at liberty to raise the claim before the appropriate Forum, in accordance with law.

With these observations, the Contempt Case is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this Order.

GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J

Dated: 26.12.2025 SSA

Issues for consideration

3 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the Respondents/Contemnors willfully and wantonly disobeyed the orders of this Court dated 06.01.2025 in W.P.No.14602 of 2024 so as to be punishable under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.¶¶54
The court held
Since the order stood complied with, the Contempt Case was dismissed, with no order as to costs, and interlocutory applications, if any, stand closed in terms of the Order.ratio¶¶70
2.
Whether the order dated 06.01.2025 in W.P.No.14602 of 2024 stands complied with by the Respondents.¶¶67
The court held
The Court held that the order dated 06.01.2025 in W.P.No.14602 of 2024 has been complied with by the Respondents, payments having been made to the Petitioners.ratio¶¶69
3.
What is the fate of the Petitioners' claim for payment of interest pending disposal of the Writ Petition, which was not recorded in the order dated 06.01.2025.¶¶68
The court held
In so far as the claim for interest pending disposal of the Writ Petition is concerned, the Petitioners are at liberty to raise that claim before the appropriate Forum, in accordance with law.ratio¶¶69

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971Sections 10 to 12¶¶54 Sections 10 to 12¶¶54
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908Section 151¶¶57

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Orders dated 06.01.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.14602 of 2024, alleged to have been willfully and wantonly disobeyed by the Respondents, for which punishment under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was sought.¶¶54
High Court of Andhra Pradesh · 06.01.2025
Prior proceeding
This Court passed orders dated 06.01.2025 in Writ Petition No.14602 of 2024; alleged non-compliance with those orders gave rise to the present contempt proceeding.¶¶54
Prior proceeding
Petitioners filed Contempt Case No.1222 of 2025 under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 seeking punishment of the Respondents for willful, wanton disobedience.¶¶54
Prior proceeding
IA No.1 of 2025 filed under Section 151 CPC seeking dispensation with filing of certified copies of the orders dated 06.01.2025 in W.P.No.14602 of 2024.¶¶57

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
KUMBA BALAMURAGAIAH AND 32 OTHERS (33 PETITIONERS, RESIDENTS OF CHINTALAPALEM VILLAGE, YERPEDU MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT)¶¶10
VALLEPU JAGADEESH
respondent
SRI PEEYUSH KUMAR IAS¶¶48
SUSHMA YAGANTI, P. USHA
respondent
SRI G SAI PRASAD IAS¶¶49
respondent
SRI B VARA PRASAD¶¶50
respondent
SRI HUSSAIN SAHEB¶¶51
respondent
SRI B MAHESWARA REDDY¶¶52

Coram

AI extract

GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASADauthor¶¶7

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Andhra Pradesh HC
Decided on: 25 Dec 2025 · December
Registered: 1 May 2025
Case no.: CC/1222/2025
CNR: APHC010228622025
Topic: Contempt of Court
Bench: Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad
Disposal: DISMISSED NO COSTS
Case type: Contempt Case

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad

Lankapotu Lakshmi Narasimha Reddy ( Withdrawn) Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
23 Dec 2025
Kondannagari Prakash Kumar Vs K. Devaki
23 Dec 2025
Sri v.L.S.N.Murthy, Vs Smt. B. Udaya Lakshmi
23 Dec 2025
M/S Adani Wilmar Limited, Kurnool Dist & Another Vs Chairman, Aperc, Hyd & 5 Ot
25 Dec 2025
M/S. Paidala Tirupathi Reddy and Brothers. Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh
25 Dec 2025
K Lalitha Lakshmi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
25 Dec 2025

Cite this judgement

Kumba Balamuragaiah v. Sri.Peeyush Kumar, IAS, CC/1222/2025 (AP), decided on 25 December 2025.

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes3

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971Sections 10 to 12 · Sections 10 to 12
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908Section 151

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Orders dated 06.01.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.14602 of 2024, alleged to have been willfully and wantonly disobeyed by the Respondents, for which punishment under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was sought.High Court of Andhra Pradesh · 06.01.2025
This Court passed orders dated 06.01.2025 in Writ Petition No.14602 of 2024; alleged non-compliance with those orders gave rise to the present contempt proceeding.
Petitioners filed Contempt Case No.1222 of 2025 under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 seeking punishment of the Respondents for willful, wanton disobedience.

View full history

Bench / Coram

GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD

Parties & counsel