Disposed¶30

M/S Kiran Services v. Registrar

Andhra Pradesh HC30 Mar 2026CC/19/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt Case No.19 of 2019, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, decided 31.03.2026 by Nyapathy Vijay, J. Petitioner M/s Kiran Services (rep. by D.C.V. Konda Reddy; counsel Nagam Chandrasekhar Reddy) alleged violation by the Registrar, Yogi Vemana University of the interim order dated 04.02.2019 in W.P.No.606 of 2019 concerning outsourcing/supply of manpower and award of contract to a third party. The writ petition was dismissed on 03.03.2021; at the petitioner's request the Contempt Case was closed, with no order as to costs. No precedents cited; no finding on contempt on merits.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Case closed; no order as to costs; pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ¶30

M/S Kiran Services Vs Registrar — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

APHC010042722019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

[3460]

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶8

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 19/2019

¶9

Between:

¶10

M/S KIRAN SERVICES, D.NO.8/ 1213, ARTS COLLEGE RAOD, PODDATUR TOWN, Y.S.R.DISTRICT, REP.BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, D.C.V. KONDA REDDY, S/O.D.BALARAMI REDDY.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

REGISTRAR, Yogi Vemana University, Vemanapuram, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District.

¶14

...CONTEMNOR

¶15

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 punish the respondent for willfully and deliberately violaltling the interim orders o the Hon'ble High Court on 4.2.2019 and seeing to award the contract to third party and pass such other orders.

¶16

¶17

IA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶18

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 to direct respondent not to permit the third party to execute work of out sourcing form the third party in pursuance of the Notification published on 11.1.2019, for supply men and human resources for the category of employees to discharge their services in various departments of the respondent university which is being executed by the Petitioner under the agreement of contract and pass such other orders.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶20

1.NAGAM CHANDRASEKHAR REDDY

¶21

Counsel for the Contemnor:

¶22

¶23

The Court made the following:

¶24

¶25

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶26

CONTEMPT CASE No.19 of 2019

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

The present Contempt Case is filed for violation of the interim order dated 04.02.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.No.606 of 2019.

¶29

At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that subsequently the Writ Petition was dismissed on 03.03.2021 and requested to close the Contempt Case.

¶30