P Ranga Raju Vs Sri Hareesh Kumar Madam IAS — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

P Ranga Raju Vs Sri Hareesh Kumar Madam IAS — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt Case closed with liberty granted to the petitioner to assail/challenge the Order dated 23.04.2012 passed by the Additional Director General of Police; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions in the Contempt Case stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents committed willful disobedience/non-compliance of the Common Order dated 30.08.2011 in O.A.No.10570/2009 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, warranting cognizance and punishment under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Court's answer

Considering the submissions made by both learned counsel and the facts and circumstances, the Contempt Case is liable to be closed by granting liberty to the petitioner to assail the Order dated 23.04.2012.

Ratio / Principle

Consequential direction: miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Contempt Case shall stand closed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Case No. 2726 of 2024 (High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Special Original Jurisdiction), decided 07.08.2025 by Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda, J.: Filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 alleging willful disobedience by five officials (Principal Secretary, Home Department; ADGP, APSP Battalions; DIG, APSP Battalions; Commandants, 9th and 6th Battalions APSP) of the Common Order dated 30.08.2011 of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A.Nos.10570 of 2009 & batch. After disposal of W.P.Nos.21683 of 2012 & batch (15.02.2023), the respondents filed a Memo dated 20.09.2024 annexing the Additional Director General of Police order dated 23.04.2012 fixing seniority including the petitioner. Counsel for the respondents submitted that the writ order cannot be implemented unless the order dated 23.04.2012 is set aside. Considering the submissions of both sides, the Court closed the Contempt Case with liberty to the petitioner to assail the order dated 23.04.2012; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

APHC010259662024

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

[3329]

THURSDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2726/2024

Between:

P RANGA RAJU, S/O. KRISHNAM RAJU, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, OCC RSI (RETD.) 14TH BATTALION, APSP TADIPATRI, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT

...PETITIONER

AND

SRI HAREESH KUMAR MADAM IAS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

SRI ATHUL SING, ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, APSP BATTALIONS,MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 503

SMT P RAJA KUMARI, DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE APSP BATTALIONS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 503

SMT RATNA KUMARI, COMMANDANT, 9TH BATTALION APSP VENKATAGIRI, NELLORE DISTRICT

SRI B PRAKASH, COMMANDANT, 6TH BATTALION, APSP MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR 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

2

be pleased to pleased to take cognizance of the offence committed by the Respondents in non-compliance of the direction issued by the Honble Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad and non implementation of the Common Order, dt.30.08.2011 in O.A.No. 10570/2009, under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act and punish the Respondents with appropriate sentence and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.SODUM ANVESHA

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

1.G RAJU

The Court made the following:

3

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2726/2024

ORDER:

This Contempt Case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the Common Order dated 30.08.2011, passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A.Nos.10570 of 2009 & batch.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after filing the present Contempt Case and after disposal of the W.P.Nos.21683 of 2012 & batch, dated 15.02.2023, the respondents filed a Memo dated 20.09.2024, wherein, they annexed the Order passed by the Additional Director General of Police, dated 23.04.2012, fixing the seniority including the petitioner herein.

The learned counsel further submits that in view of the Order passed by the Additional Director General of Police, dated 23.04.2012, the petitioner has to challenge the Order for redressal of his grievance, if any, for which, he is requesting for liberty to challenge the same.

The learned counsel for the respondents submits that in view of the Order already passed by the authority concerned dated 23.04.2012, the Order of this Court in the Writ Petition cannot be implementable unless the Order dated 23.04.2012 is set aside. Hence, the Order of the Writ Petition is duly complied with by passing such order. Therefore, the present contempt also cannot be enforced.

4

Considering the submissions made by both the learned counsel and in

view of the facts and circumstances as stated above, the Contempt Case is liable to be closed by granting liberty to the petitioner to assail the Order dated 23.04.2012.

Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed with liberty. No order as to costs.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the Contempt

Case shall stand closed.

VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J

07.08.2025 SCH

5

251

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

Contempt Case No.2726 of 2024

07.08.2025

SCH