Disposed¶30

Byrapaneni Naresh v. Vivek Yadav

Andhra Pradesh HC4 Mar 2026CC/1982/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court contempt case closed: C.C No.1982 of 2022, Justice Ninala Jayasurya, 05.03.2026. Contemnors: District Collector Vivek Yadav, RDO S Bhaskar Reddy and Tahasildar G Karuna Kumar of Guntur district. Compliance with writ petition orders shown through endorsement dated 09.03.2022 intimating reasons for rejection of the petitioners' application; no representation by petitioners on the hearing date; contempt case closed, no costs; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, closed.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed without costs in view of compliance evidenced by the endorsement dated 09.03.2022; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stand closed. ¶30

Byrapaneni Naresh Vs Vivek Yadav — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

APHC010310572022

¶2

[3209]

¶3

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

¶4

THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1982/2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

BYRAPANENI NARESH, S/O SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED 65 YEARS, OCC.ADVOCATE, R/O D.NO.8-49, PERECHARLA, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BYRAPANENI RAMESH KUMAR,, S/O SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O D.NO.8-50, PERECHARLA, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶10

BYRAPANENI VENKATA RAO,, S/O VENKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O D.NO. 1-116, PERECHARLA, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER(S)

¶12

AND

¶13

VIVEK YADAV, I.A.S., OCC.- DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AT GUNTUR.

¶14

S BHASKAR REDDY, OCC.REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUNTUR DIVISION, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶15

G KARUNA KUMAR, OCC.TAHASILDAR, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶16

...CONTEMNOR(S):

¶17

NJS,J C.C No.1982 of 2022

¶18

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶20

1.UPENDRA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶21

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

¶22

1.NARASIMHA REDDY. G . L

¶23

NJS,J C.C No.1982 of 2022

¶24

¶25

The Court made the following Order:

¶26

No representation on behalf of the petitioners.

¶27

Heard Mr. G L Narasimha Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents, who made submissions with reference to the reply-affidavit and the material enclosed to it.

¶28

Drawing the attention of this Court to the endorsement dated 09.03.2022, the learned counsel submits that in compliance with the orders passed in the writ petition, the reasons for rejection of the petitioners application was intimated through the said endorsement.

¶29

Perusing the said endorsement, this Court is inclined to close the contempt case.

¶30

Accordingly, the contempt case is closed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶31

Date:05.03.2026 Ksj

¶32

___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

Byrapaneni Naresh v. Vivek Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Byrapaneni Naresh v. Vivek Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Ravi Electricals Rewinding Works,Rep.by Prop.,Vskptm. Vs Transmission Corporation of a.P.Ltd.,Rep.by Ce.,Vskptm.,&Anr

Rpp Ltd., H. No. 1-B, (New No. 618) Arora Colony, Road No.3 Vs Eastern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Ltd.

Reddimallu Krishna Reddy, Kadapa Dt Vs Superintending Engineer, Apcpdcl., & 3

Rain Cii Carbon (Vizag) Limited, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

G. Guru Prasad, Vs B. Krishna Murthy

Akana Yesu Babu Vs Sunil Kumar