Gunti Raveendra Nath Vs R Madhusudhan — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Gunti Raveendra Nath Vs R Madhusudhan — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No punishment imposed and no order beyond the earlier order; petitioner left at liberty to file appropriate application before the appropriate authority, to be considered in accordance with law; no order as to costs; Miscellaneous Petitions pending in the contempt case stood closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents wilfully and wantonly failed to implement the High Court's order dated 24.02.2025 passed in I.A. No.1 in W.P. No.8128/2023 (directing water supply to the petitioner's cultivation) and are liable to punishment under Sec. 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act.

Court's answer

Learned counsel for the petitioner admitted that the respondents have complied with the Court's orders and released water to the petitioner's agriculture cultivation.

Ratio / Principle

Since the respondents complied with the Court's orders, the Court declined to pass any order beyond the order already passed and closed the present Contempt Case.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Case No.3506 of 2025, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), decided 18.02.2026 by Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao. Petitioner Gunti Raveendra Nath invoked Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 against the Tahasildar/Mandal Revenue Officer, Somala Mandal, and the Panchayat Secretary, Somala Village Grama Panchayath, alleging wilful and wanton non-implementation of the High Court's order dated 24.02.2025 (passed in I.A. No.1 in W.P. No.8128/2023) directing supply of water to his cultivation. Learned counsel for the petitioner admitted that the respondents had complied and released the water. Holding that no order beyond the order already passed was called for, the Court closed the Contempt Case, left the petitioner free to file an appropriate application before the appropriate authority to be considered in accordance with law, made no order as to costs, and closed the Miscellaneous Petitions pending in the contempt case.

[3330]

APHC010612242025

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

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

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3506/2025

Between:

GUNTI RAVEENDRA NATH, S/O G NAGA MALLAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, D/O 1-82/2,CHAKALI STTREET SOMALA,CHITTOR DIST. AP

...PETITIONER

AND

R MADHUSUDHAN, TAHASILDAR/MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, SOMALA MANDAL, CHITTOR DIST.

N VISWAMALINI, PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, SOMALA VILLAGE GRAMA PANCHAYATH, SOMALA MANDAL, CHITTOR DIST

...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 Prayed the respondents willfully and wantonly is not implementing orders of the Hon'ble High Court passed in in I A No.1 in WP No.8128/2023 dtd.24/02/2025, and Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to punish the Respondents for Non- Implementation of Hon'ble High Court Order by His Lordship's , and deliberately avoiding and the action of the respondents amounts to punishment under Sec. 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.D SATYAVATHI

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

1.SUSHMA YAGANTI

2.Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats

The Court made the following:

2

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

CONTEMPT CASE No.3506 of 2025

ORDER:

This Court, vide order dated 24.02.2025 in W.P.No.8128 of 2023, directed the respondents to provide water supply to the petitioner’s cultivation.

Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly admitted that the respondents have complied with the orders of this Court and released the water to the petitioner’s agriculture cultivation.

This Court is not inclined to pass any order beyond the order already passed. As the respondents have complied with the orders of this Court, the present Contempt Case is closed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file appropriate application before the appropriate authority and the same may be considered in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed.

__________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Date: 18.02.2026 Note: Issue C.C.by 23.02.2026 B/o. KBN

3

14

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Contempt Case No.3506 of 2025

Note: Issue C.C.by 23.02.2026 B/o. KBN

18.02.2026