Disposed¶34

Shaik Shakir Basha v. Abdul Khadir

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Aug 2025CC/2886/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt Case 2886 of 2024; wilful disobedience; Andhra Pradesh State Waqf Board; caution board; JCB; Gargeyapuram village; Kurnool; Survey No.88; Ac.14.28 cents; W.P.No.22529 of 2018; order dated 20.11.2023; unconditional apology; counter-affidavit dated 21.08.2025; contempt case closed; Ninala Jayasurya, J.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Case closed without punitive action; unconditional apology of respondent No.2 accepted; petitioners left free to seek recourse to law for any future violation of the order dated 20.11.2023 in W.P.No.22529 of 2018; no costs; all pending applications closed. ¶34

Shaik Shakir Basha Vs Abdul Khadir — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents' erection of a caution board describing the land as belonging to the Andhra Pradesh State Waqf Board and their resort to coercive action (allegedly deploying a JCB), after the order dated 20.11.2023 in W.P.No.22529 of 2018, constituted wilful disobedience and contempt of court. +1 more

¶26

Court's answer

Any attempts by the respondents, whether by erecting a caution board or adopting coercive measures, while the order dated 20.11.2023 remained unchallenged, tantamount to disobedience of the orders of this Court and cannot be countenanced.

¶30

Ratio / Principle

While the counter-affidavit and the material on record showed that the caution board had been removed, the allegation that a JCB was deployed as part of coercive action was not controverted by the respondents.

¶30

Key takeaways

In view of the instructions signed by respondent No.2, placed before the Court with the counter-affidavit dated 21.08.2025, that there is no interference with the subject property and any action would be by following due process of law, the Court closed the Contempt Case accepting the unconditional apology rendered in that counter-affidavit.ratio¶32
It is open to the petitioners to seek recourse to law in the event the respondents resort to any action in violation of the order dated 20.11.2023 in W.P.No.22529 of 2018.obiter¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt - alleged wilful disobedience of order dated 20.11.2023 in W.P.No.22529 of 2018, whereby respondents were directed not to take coercive action regarding Ac.14.28 cents in Survey No.88 of Gargeyapuram village (Kurnool) except by following due process of law - allegation that respondents erected a caution board styling the land as Andhra Pradesh State Waqf Board property and deployed a JCB - caution board stated to have been removed, but the JCB allegation was not controverted - Court held that such attempts, the order remaining unchallenged, tantamount to disobedience of its orders and cannot be countenanced - on instructions of respondent No.2 (no interference with the subject property; any action by due process) placed with counter-affidavit dated 21.08.2025 and his unconditional apology, Contempt Case closed - liberty reserved to petitioners to seek recourse to law for any future violation - no costs; pending applications closed.

APHC010284572024

[3209]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶5

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶6

FRIDAY,THE T WENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO T H OUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA CONTEMPT CASE No: 2886 of 2024

¶9

Between:

¶10

SHAIK SHAKIR BAS H A, S/O SHAIK HAJAM MIAH, AGED 6 7 YEARS, OCC-CULTIVATION, R/O D.NO.2-107, KOTA STREET, GARGEYAPURAM VILLAGE, KURNOOL MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRIC T .

¶11

SHAIK SHAFIULLAH , S/O SHAIK SAJID BASHA, AGED 40 YEARS, OCC-CULTIVATION, R/O D.NO.2-107, KOTA STREET, GARGEYAPURAM V ILLAGE, KUMOOL MANDAL, KUMOOL DISTRICT.

¶12

...PETITIONER(S)

¶13

AND

¶14

ABDUL KHADIR, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TH E ANDHRA PRADESH STATE W AKF BOARD, 4^TH FLOOR, IM D AD GHAR COMPLEX, KA L ESWARA RAO MARKET, VIJ A YAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶15

ALTAF HUSSAIN, IN S PECTOR AUDITOR WAQFS, COLL E CTORATE BUILDING, KURNOO L .

¶16

...CONTEMNOR(S):

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶18

1.D KRISHNA MURTH Y

¶19

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

¶20

1.SHAIK KHAJA BASH A

¶21

¶22

The Court made the following Order:

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard learned counsel for the respondents.

¶24

The petitioners herein alleging that attempts are being made to dispossess them from an extent of Ac.14.28 cents in Survey No.88 of Gargeyapuram village, without following due process of law, filed W.P.No.22529 of 2018.

¶25

After hearing the parties in the said writ petition and taking note of the averments made in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents that the Waqf Board in exercise of statutory provisions would take steps to evict the illegal occupants and the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel for the Waqf Board that due procedure contemplated under law would be followed, this Court by an order dated 20.11.2023 disposed of the Writ Petition with a direction to the respondents therein not to take coercive action in respect of the lands in question, except by following due process of law.

¶26

Mr.D.Krishna Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioners referring to the material filed along with the Contempt Case made submissions to the effect that in utter disregard to the order dated 20.11.2023 of this Court, the respondents herein erected a Caution Board mentioning as if the lands belong to the Andhra Pradesh State Waqf Board and resorted to coercive action to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the subject matter lands by deploying a JCB. He submits that the said acts of the respondents constitute

¶27

¶28

willful disobedience and violation of the orders dated 20.11.2023 and as such, the respondents are liable for Contempt of Court.

¶29

On the other hand, Mr.Shaik Khaja Basha, learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent made submissions and states that as averred in the counteraffidavit of respondent No.2, on coming to know that an order was passed in W.P.No.22529 of 2018, the caution board was removed. He also submits that in fact a letter dated 17.08.2024 in this regard was addressed by the 2^nd respondent to the 1^st respondent. He submits that there is no wilful disobedience on the part of the respondents as argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners, and therefore, urges for dismissal of the Contempt Case.

¶30

Considered the submissions made and perused the order dated 20.11.2023, which is clear and unambiguous. In the light of the said order, any attempts in whatsoever manner, be it by erecting a caution board or adopting coercive measures, more particularly when the order dated 20.11.2023 remained unchallenged, cannot be appreciated. Though as per the counter-affidavit and the material placed on record, it would appear that the caution board was removed, the allegation of deploying a JCB as a part of coercive action was not controverted. Any such attempts on the part of the respondents in the light of the submissions made while disposing of W.P.No.22529 of 2018 that due process of law would be followed, tantamount to disobedience of the orders of this Court and cannot be countenanced. Be that as it may.

¶31

¶32

In the light of the instructions signed by the 2^nd respondent which are placed before this Court along with the counter-affidavit dated 21.08.2025 to the effect that there is no interference with the subject property and any action would be by following due process of law, this Court is inclined to close the Contempt Case by accepting the unconditional apology rendered in the counter-affidavit dated 21.08.2025.

¶33

It is open for the petitioners to seek recourse to law, in the event, the respondents resort to any action in violation of the order dated 20.11.2023 in W.P.No.22529 of 2018.

¶34