Sri. Edara Sai Ram, Vs G Sai Prasad, IAS — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sri. Edara Sai Ram, Vs G Sai Prasad, IAS — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt Case closed with no order as to costs, upon learned counsel for the petitioner reporting that the respondents have complied with the writ order dated 08.09.2025; miscellaneous applications pending, if any, also stood closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Contempt Case filed for wilful violation of the order dated 08.09.2025 in W.P.No.22836 of 2025 (direction to release Rs.4,09,244/- and Rs.4,41,627/- per quality control certificates dated 08.01.2025) should proceed or be closed in view of the reported compliance by the respondents.

Court's answer

Recording the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the order dated 08.09.2025 in W.P.No.22836 of 2025 (referred to in counsel's submission as W.P.No.22835 of 2025) has been complied with by the respondents, this Court closed the Contempt Case with no order as to costs.

Ratio / Principle

As a sequel to the closure of the Contempt Case, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Case No. 3556 of 2025 (High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Smt Justice V. Sujatha) was filed alleging wilful violation of the order dated 08.09.2025 in W.P.No.22836 of 2025, whereby the respondents were directed to release Rs.4,09,244/- and Rs.4,41,627/- to the petitioner-contractor in accordance with quality control certificates dated 08.01.2025, within two months, any interest component being governed by a subsisting clause in the agreement/work order, and with no order as to costs. When the contempt case came up on 13.02.2026, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ order had been complied with by the respondents and requested closure. The Court, recording that submission, closed the Contempt Case with no order as to costs; miscellaneous applications pending, if any, also stand closed as a sequel. The Court did not itself adjudicate the alleged violation; closure rests on counsel's report of compliance.

1

APHC010620042025

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

[3333]

FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3556/2025

Between:

SRI. EDARA SAI RAM, SRI. EDARA SESHIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O.D.NO.6-26, BEZAWADAVARIPALEM (V), LINGAMGUNTA (P), MADDIPADU (M), PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

G SAI PRASAD IAS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY OF IRRIGATION AND WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

SRI B MURALI KRISHNA, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DRAINAGE DIVISION, CHIRALA, BAPATLA DISTRICT. (R-2)

SRI PEEYUSH KUMAR IAS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. (R3)

...CONTEMNOR(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.MODAPOTHULA SUMALATHA

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

1.NAGARAJU PULLAGURA

The Court made the following:

2

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3556/2025

O R D E R:

This Contempt Case is filed for willful violation of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.22836 of 2025 on 08.09.2025, wherein this Court passed the following order:

“… The Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the amount to the petitioner in accordance with the quality control certificates dated 08.01.2025 for a sum of Rs.4,09,244/- and Rs.4,41,627/- respectively, issued by the respondents within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order

As far as interest component is concerned, if there is any subsisting clause in the agreement/work order envisaging payment of interest upon any amount which is due and payable, the same is binding upon both the parties.

There shall be no order as to costs".

Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, M.Sumalatha, learned

Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the order dated 08.09.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.22835 of 2025 has been complied-with by the respondents. Therefore, requested this Court to close the contempt case.

Recording the above submission, the Contempt Case is closed. No costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand

closed.

_______________________ SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

KS Dated 13.02.2026.

3

31

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3556/2025

DATED 13.02.2026

KS