Disposed

Resu Ramana v. Mukesh Kumar Meena

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Sept 2026CC/2366/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a contempt petition alleging willful violation of a High Court order dated 05.01.2026. At the hearing, the petitioner's counsel submitted that the order had been complied with. The court recorded the submission and closed the contempt case with no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications closed.

Resu Ramana Vs Mukesh Kumar Meena — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

[3330]

¶2

APHC010302102026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

THURSDAY, THE 17^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶8

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2366/2026

¶9

Between:

¶10

RESU RAMANA, S/O SAMBAYYA, AGE 43 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O D.NO C90, GUNADALAPETA SARIKA VILLAGE VIZIANAGARAM MANDAL VIZAYANAGARAM DISTRICT - A.P535004

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

MUKESH KUMAR MEENA, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, LAND ACQUISITION, UNDER THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT, A.P SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522238. A.P

¶14

SRI PEEYUSH KUMAR, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522238. A.P

¶15

SMT A SURYA KUMARI, DISTRICT COLLECTOR, AT VIZAYANAGARAM, A.P. VIZAYANAGARAM DISTRICT - 535003.

¶16

SRI P V V SURYA NARAYANA RAJU, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER AT VIZAYANAGARAM, A.P VIZAYANAGARAM DISTRICT - 535003

¶17

...CONTEMNOR(S):

¶18

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 summon, prosecute and punish the respondents under sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act for Willful, deliberate violation of the

¶19

¶20

orders of this Hon’ble High Court dated 05.01.2026 in the Writ petition No.29262/2023 and to pass

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶22

1.T LAKSHMI PADMAJA

¶23

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

¶24

1.NAGARAJU PULLAGURA

¶25

2.K M KRISHNA REDDY

¶26

The Court made the following:

¶27

¶28

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.2366 of 2026

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order of this Court has been complied with by the respondents.

¶31

Recording the said submission, the present Contempt Case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶32

Consequently, interlocutory applications, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed.

¶33

__________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Date: 17.09.2026 KBN

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶38

Contempt Case No.2366 of 2026

¶39

17.09.2026 KBN

Resu Ramana v. Mukesh Kumar Meena

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Resu Ramana v. Mukesh Kumar Meena

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases