Peddisetty Veeraiah Vs Bapi Raju — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Peddisetty Veeraiah Vs Bapi Raju — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

APHC010401872025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3460]

WEDNESDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2158/2025

Between:

PEDDISETTY VEERAIAH, S/O.LATE MADAHAVA RAO, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O.D.NO. 17/254-1-A, SIDIMBIVARI AGRAHARAM, EEDEPALLI, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT

...PETITIONER

AND

BAPI RAJU, MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, MACHILIPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, MACHILIPATANAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

J TULASIRAM, J.S.R. CONSTRUCTIONS, S/O.SHANTA RAO, AGED MAJOR, R/O.D.NO.1-165, SANGAM JAGARLAMUDI VILLAGE, TENALI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

P SIVA RAMA KRISHNA PRASAD, S/O.SATYANARAYANA, AGED MAJOR, R/O.SHAMOLE, BEGUMPET, RBI QUARTERS, 0PP. 2ND GATE. CORNER STONE APARTMENT, FLATNO.302, D.NO. 1- 11-129/15A, SECUNDERABAD, TELANGANA STATE.

2

...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 above named respondents under the provision of Contempt of Courts Act for violation of deliberately intentional and disobedience of orders dt08-07-2025 in W.P.No. 16900 of 2025 of HONBLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

1.A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP)

2.V V PRABHAKARA RAO

The Court made the following:

3

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

C.C.No.2158 OF 2025

O R D E R:

This Contempt Case is filed for willful and deliberate violation of the interim order of this Court passed in W.P.No.16900 of 2025 dated 08.07.2025.

Interim order passed by this Court in W.P.No.16900 of 2025 dated 08.07.2025, reads as under:-

<Having heard the respective counsel and considering the instructions issued by learned Standing Counsel for the Respondents restraining the Respondents 3 and 4 from proceeding with further constructions without obtaining any building plan from the Respondent/ Corporation, in that view, there shall be interim direction as follows:

(i). The Respondents 3 and 4 are restrained from making any further construction without obtaining any building permission from the Respondent/ Corporation.

(ii). The Respondent/ Corporation shall consider the objections made by the Petitioner before issuing any building plan in favour of the Respondents 3 and 4.=

Counter affidavit was filed by Respondent No.3 (Respondent No.4 in W.P.No.16900 of 2025) and in the counter affidavit, it was submitted that the building plan was

issued in favour of Respondent No.3 vide B.A.No.1070/0118 /B/MCP/EDPL/2025 dated 14.07.2025 for construction of a

4

residential house consisting of a stilt, ground, and 3 upper floors. It is also stated that considering the interim order passed by this Court in W.P.No.16900 of 2025, the objections of the Petitioner were considered, and an endorsement was issued by the Municipal Commissioner vide Roc.No.4099/2025/G2 dated 15.09.2025, rejecting the objections raised by the Petitioner.

In the light of compliance of orders passed by this Court, no further orders are required to be passed, and accordingly, this Contempt Case is dismissed.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed.

__________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J

Date: 11.02.2026 chs

5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

37

CONTEMPT CASE NO:2158/2025

Dt. 11.02.2026

chs