Yarlagadda Ramesh Babu Vs T Satyanarayana — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

Yarlagadda Ramesh Babu Vs T Satyanarayana — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No punishment imposed on the alleged contemnors; the Contempt Case is closed, with liberty left to the petitioner to approach this Court again in the event of further non-compliance after the stay orders granted to the encroachers are vacated; pending interlocutory applications (including I.A. No.1 of 2023) stand closed as a sequel.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents/contemnors willfully and deliberately disobeyed the order dated 14-09-2022 in W.P.(PIL) No.128 of 2022 by failing to remove the encroachments despite the petitioner's follow-up. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The respondents were unable to comply with the directions of this Court on account of the subsequent Order of this Court (the stay orders obtained by the encroachers in W.P.Nos.2889 & 17372 of 2023).

Key takeaways

In view of the respondents' inability to comply on account of the subsequent order of this Court, it would not be appropriate to keep the present Contempt Case hanging over the heads of the respondents.ratio¶42
The Contempt Case is closed, leaving it open to the petitioner to approach this Court in the event of further non-compliance with its directions after the orders of stay granted to the encroachers have been vacated.ratio¶43
As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Case No. 3383 of 2023 (APHC010306342023), High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), decided 21.07.2025 by a Division Bench of R. Raghunandan Rao and Sumathi Jagadam, JJ. (order per R. Raghunandan Rao, J.). The petitioner sought punishment of nine officials (NHAI, R&B Department, Collectorate, revenue, gram panchayat and police) under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 for willfully and deliberately disobeying the Division Bench order dated 14-09-2022 in W.P.(PIL) No.128 of 2022, which had directed removal of encroachments on the R&B Road (Inkollu-Parchur Road) and on either side of Chilakalurpeta to Cheerala Road. Counsel for respondents 1, 2 and 4 to 6 submitted that the encroachers had obtained orders of stay against demolition in W.P.Nos.2889 & 17372 of 2023, in which the petitioner had impleaded himself seeking vacation of the stays. Holding that the respondents were unable to comply with the directions on account of this subsequent order of the Court itself, the Bench closed the Contempt Case, leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the Court again upon vacatur of the stay orders; pending interlocutory applications stood closed as a sequel.

[3541]

APHC010306342023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3383/2023

Between:

YARLAGADDA RAMESH BABU, S/O.SRI Y.TIRUPATHIRAYUDU HINDU, AGED 62 YEARS OCC.CULTIVATION, R/O.NAGULAPALEM(V) PARCHUR MANGAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH

...PETITIONER

AND

T SATYANARAYANA, SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA PLOT NO.21, TEACHERS COLONY, GURUNANAK NAGAR ROAD VIJAYAWADA 520 008, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

SRI PRADUMNA KUMAR IAS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF A.P., R AND B DEPARTMENT, A.P.SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

SRI RANJIT PASHA, DISTRICT COLLECTOR PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE, ANDHRA PRADESH

SRI K VIJAYARATNAM, SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER RANDB DEPARTMENT, ONGOLE PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

SRI MEKALA NARASIMHULU, DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (RANDB) N.H.SUB-DIVISION, GUNTUR GUNTUR DISTRICT,

2

ANDHRA PRADESH

SRI M NARASIMHULU, ASSISTANT ENGINEER R AND B DEPARTMENT, PARCHUR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH

SRI K NEHRU BABU, MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER PARCHUR MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH

KATTA RANI SECRETARY, PURCHUR GRAMPANCHAYAT PARCHUR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH

SRI N CHENCHU PRASAD, STATION HOUSE OFFICER PARCHUR POLICE STATION PARCHUR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH

...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 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act for willfully and deliberately disobeying the order of this Hon'ble Court Dt.14-09-2022 passed in W.P.(PIL) NO.128/2022 and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

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 direct the respondents to implement the orders Dt.14-09-2022 passed in W.P.(PIL) NO.128/2022 forthwith pending disposal of the above contempt case and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.SUDHAKARA RAO AMBATI

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

1.ASHOK RAM V

2.P SUBASH

3.G VENKATA REDDY

4.V MAHESWAR REDDY

3

The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

The petitioner had approached this Court by way of W.P.(PIL).No.128 of 2022 seeking directions to the respondents therein, to remove the encroachments on the side of the R&B Road (Inkollu-Parchur Road) from RTC bus stand to culvert and also on either side of Chilakalurpeta to Cheerala Road from Bommala centre to MRO office, Upputuru.

A Division Bench of this Court, by an Order 14.09.2022, had allowed this Writ Petition along with the Batch of other Writ Petitions with a direction to the authorities enumerated in these batch of cases, to remove all encroachments after following procedure.

The petitioner, has now approached this Court by way of the present Contempt Case, contending that the respondents mentioned in the Contempt Case had not complied with the said directions despite the follow up of the petitioner in as much as the encroachments have not been removed.

Sri Ashok Ram. V, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 & 2 and 4 to 6 submits that these respondents had initially taken up the process of removal of the encroachments, at that stage the encroachers had approached this Court by way of W.P.Nos.2889 & 17372 of 2023 and had obtained Orders of stay against the removal of the said encroachments, by demolition of structure. He would also contend that the petitioner herein had also impleaded himself, in these Writ Petitions for getting the said Order vacated.

In view of the fact that the respondents are unable to comply with the directions of this Court on account of the subsequent Order of this Court, it would not be appropriate to keep the present Contempt Case hanging over the heads of the respondents.

Accordingly, this Contempt Case is closed leaving it open to the petitioner to approach this Court in the event of further non-compliance with

4

the directions of this Court, after the Orders of stay granted to the encroachers have been vacated.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any shall stand

closed.

_______________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.

_____________________ SUMATHI JAGADAM, J Dated: 21.07.2025 BSM

5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

AND

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3383/2023

(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao )

Date: 21.07.2025

BSM