Disposed

Veerla Veera Venkateswara Rao, v. Sri G. Sai Prasad

Andhra Pradesh HC10 Sept 2026CC/1633/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition filed for non-compliance with a High Court order directing payment of contract amounts based on quality control certificates. The respondents produced evidence that the bills had been cleared and paid on 11.09.2026. The petitioner did not dispute the payment, and the court closed the contempt case with no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed; respondents' compliance with payment order recorded; no order as to costs.

Veerla Veera Venkateswara Rao, Vs… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

APHC010084372026

¶2

[3333]

¶3

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

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 11^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶7

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1633/2026

¶8

Between:

¶9

VEERLA VEERA VENKATESWARA RAO,, S/O SRINIVASA RAO AGE 34 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTER, R/O. 3-24, NEAR VEERLA VARI DEVARA GUDI, MEDURU VILLAGE AND POST, PAMIDIMUKKALA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

SRI G SAI PRASAD, S/O NOT KNOWN, OCCU IAS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY IRRIGATION AND COMMAND AREA DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT) SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶13

SRI PEEYUSH KUMAR, S/O NOT KNOWN, OCCU IAS THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

SRI D K BALAJI, S/O NOT KNOWN, OCCU - IAS THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR OF KRISHNA DISTRICT

¶15

SRI P PRASHANTHI, S/O NOT KNOWN. THE COMMISSIONER COMMAND AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VIJAYAWADA.

¶16

SRI B KIRAN BABU, S/O NOT KNOWN. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DRAINAGE DIVISION, GUDIVADA.

¶17

SRI M P BADE SAHAB, S/O NOT KNOWN. THE PAY AND ACCOUNT OFFICER, THIRD FLOOR, RAMA MANDIR STREET, ARUNDALPET, GOVERNOR PET, VIJAYAWADA.

¶18

...CONTEMNOR(S):

¶19

¶20

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 direct the Notice the Respondents herein and punish the respondents under Sec. 10 to 12 of Contempt of Court Act,1971 for deliberate, intentional and willful violation of the order and deliberate disobedience to the Orders of this Hon'ble Court dated 11.11.2025 passed in W.P. No. 13424 of 2024

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶22

1.SRAVAN KUMAR NAIDANA

¶23

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

¶24

1.NAGARAJU PULLAGURA

¶25

2.SOMA RAJU YELISETTI

¶26

3.T LAKSHMI PADMAJA

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.13424 of 2024, dated 11.11.2025. The operative portion of the said order is extracted hereunder:

¶31

“…..this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the amounts to the petitioner in accordance with quality control certificates dated 04.03.2025, 20.11.2024, 28.02.2025 and 06.06.2025 issued by the respondents, within a period of five (5) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order….”

¶32

Today when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/contemnors furnished a copy of Letter No.EE/DRG/GDV/AB/A3/Court Cases/ 990 M, dated 11.09.2026, issued by the 5^th respondent, wherein it is stated that the Finance Department has received the following bills in respect of the present contempt case and the same have been cleared. The details are as follows:

¶33

SI. No	W.P.No & C.C.No	Type of work	Name of work	NIDHI Bill No.	Bill Amount	Status of Bill
1	13424/2 024 1633/ 2026	O&M	O and M to Removal of Weed growth in Lavala Medium drain and New kalidindi Mandal vide (Agt No.19/2023-24 for Rs.213086/- ) Kaikaluru	2026- 7873495	246461	Bill paid vide RBISH00865967 651 Dt.11.09.2026

¶34

¶35

2	13424/2 024 1633/ 2026	O&M	O and M to Removal of weed growth in drain course of Pedayadaiagad i bridge between 1^st span to 56^th span in weed free condition for the year 2023-24 vide agreement No.21/20232 for Rs.830815/- Kaikaluru	2026- 7883191	931042	Bill paid vide RBISH00865967 659 Dt.11.09.2026
3	13424/2 024 1633/ 2026	O&M	O and M to Removal of Weed growth in Peddakommile ur Major Drain From KM 0 000 to KM 26 600 vide agreement No.20/2023-24 for Rs.41,933/- Kaikaluru	2026- 7861069	492370	Bill paid vide RBISH00865967 657 Dt.11.09.2026
4	13424/2 024 1633/ 2026	O&M	O and M Strengthening of Banks of Hamsaladevi minor drain infall into the new Brail drainage basin for the 2023-24 vide agreement No.22/2023-24 for Rs.9,75,413/- Challapalli	2026- 7880789	124267 1	Bill paid vide RBISH00865967 647 Dt.11.09.2026
5	13424/2 024 1633/ 2026	O&M	O and M Removal of Weed Growth in Chandraiah Major Drain	2026- 7883706	115598 0	Bill paid vide RBISH00865967 652 Dt.11.09.2026

¶36

¶37

from Km 4 80
to 5,800 and its
infalling minor
drains in weed
free condition
for the year
2023-24 vide
agreement No.18/2023-24
Rs.9,89,524/-
Gudivada

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioner has not disputed the said fact and requested this Court to close the contempt case.

¶39

Recording the above submissions and, in view of the fact that the amounts have been cleared by the respondents in favour of the petitioner, the Contempt Case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶40

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this case shall stand closed.

¶41

___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶42

Date: 11.09.2026 KGR

Veerla Veera Venkateswara Rao, v. Sri G. Sai Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veerla Veera Venkateswara Rao, v. Sri G. Sai Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases