Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

K R Suryanarayana Vs Piyush Kumar IAS — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Home
Andhra Pradesh HC
2026
K R Suryanarayana Vs Piyush Kumar IASK R Suryanarayana v. Piyush Kumar IAS

Disposed¶36

K R Suryanarayana v. Piyush Kumar IAS

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Sections 10 to 12

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Jul 2026CC/667/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

C.C.No.667 of 2026 (identifier APHC010072792026), High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Special Original Jurisdiction, decided 14.07.2026 by Justice Nyapathy Vijay (single Judge). Contempt case filed by K R Suryanarayana, Superintendent, O/O Chief Commissioner of State Tax, Gunturu District, against Piyush Kumar IAS (Principal Secretary, Dept. of Commercial Tax (Finance)) and A Babu IAS (Chief Commissioner of State Tax), under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971, for alleged willful violation of the interim order dated 31.12.2025 in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.36103 of 2025 directing effect to the DPC proceedings of July/August 2025 for promotion/appointment by transfer to Superintendant Grade-I (Gazetted). Original DPC record produced by standing counsel Ramalingeswara Rao Kocharla Kota showed no recommendation for the Petitioner; Court held no contempt made out and closed the case; miscellaneous petitions dismissed. Keywords: contempt; non-compliance; DPC proceedings; promotion; Superintendant Grade-I Gazetted; Commercial Tax; Andhra Pradesh.

What did the court decide?

No punishment imposed and no relief granted to the Petitioner; the Court held no contempt was made out and closed the contempt case; miscellaneous petitions, if any, were directed to stand dismissed (paras 36-38). ¶36

Why is it important?

On perusal of the original DPC record produced by the Respondents, the Court noticed that there was no recommendation for the Petitioner for promotion/appointment by transfer to the post of Superintendant Grade-I (Gazetted) (the sentence beginning 'there is no recommendation for' at para 32 continues at para 33 with the post specified). ¶32

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No punishment imposed and no relief granted to the Petitioner; the Court held no contempt was made out and closed the contempt case; miscellaneous petitions, if any, were directed to stand dismissed (paras 36-38).

Issue for consideration

Whether the Respondents willfully, wantonly and deliberately violated the Order of the Court dated 31.12.2025 (passed in W.P. No.36103 of 2025, directing effect to be given to the DPC proceedings for the Petitioner's promotion), attracting punishment under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Court's answer

On perusal of the original DPC record produced by the Respondents, the Court noticed that there was no recommendation for the Petitioner for promotion/appointment by transfer to the post of Superintendant Grade-I (Gazetted) (the sentence beginning 'there is no recommendation for' at para 32 continues at para 33 with the post specified).

Ratio / Principle

In that view of the matter, no contempt was made out, and accordingly the contempt case was closed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Sections 10 to 12 - Alleged willful, wanton, deliberate non-compliance with interim order dated 31.12.2025 in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.36103 of 2025, which had directed the Respondents to give effect to the DPC proceedings held in July/August 2025 insofar as the Petitioner (a Superintendent in the office of the Chief Commissioner of State Tax) was concerned for promotion/appointment by transfer to the post of Superintendant Grade-I (Gezetted) - Respondents' learned standing counsel produced the original DPC file; perusal by the Court and the Petitioner's counsel showed that no recommendation had been made for the Petitioner to the said post - Holding that no contempt was made out, the Court closed the contempt case; miscellaneous petitions, if any, stood dismissed. (Nyapathy Vijay, J., 14.07.2026)

A

Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : Date of uploading :

APHC010072792026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3460] AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE 14^th DAY OF JULY 2026

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 667/2026

Between:

K R SURYANARAYANA, S/O K.V.N. SARMA (LATE) AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, SUPERINTENDENT AT O/O CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (CCST), KUNCHANAPALLI, GUNTURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH RIO 23-36-4A, JAGARLAMUDI STREET, LAKSHMI NAGAR, SATYANRAYANAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA,ANDHRA PRADESH-520011

...PETITIONER

AND

PIYUSH KUMAR IAS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAX (FINANCE),SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI,AMARAVATI-522238

A BABU IAS, CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (CCST) GOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH, DOOR NO.12, 468-4, ADJACENT TO NH 16 SERVICE ROAD, KUNCHANAPALLI, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA PRADESH 522501

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 respondent herein under the Sec.10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for willful, wanton, deliberate violation of the Order of this Hon'ble Court dated 31.12.2025, passed W.P. No.36103 of 2025 and to pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.KANDERI CHETHAN

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

1.RAMALINGESWARA RAO KOCHARLA KOTA

The Court made the following:

Whether the order is :

Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No

3

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

C.C.No.667 of 2026

O R DE R:

This contempt case is filed for non-compliance of the order dated 31.12.2025 in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.36103 of 2025.

This Court taking note of the submissions in the writ petition, passed interim order directing the Respondents to give effect to the DPC proceedings held in July/August, 2025 insofar as Petitioner is concerned for promotion/appointment by transfer to the post of Superintendant Grade-I (Gezetted). As the said order is not complied, present contempt case is filed.

Sri Ramalingeswara Rao Kocharlakota, learned standing counsel, passed on the original file of DPC and contended that no recommendation was made in so far as the Petitioner is concerned.

This Court had perused the record that is produced and noticed that there is no recommendation for

promotion/appointment by transfer to the post of Superintendant Grade-I (Gazetted) insofar as Petitioner is concerned. Learned counsel for the Petitioner also perused the record. After perusal,

4

the Original DPC record is returned to the learned counsel for the Respondents.

In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that no contempt is made out and accordingly, the contempt case is closed.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall stand

dismissed.

___________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J

Date: 14.07.2026

KLP

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the Respondents willfully, wantonly and deliberately violated the Order of the Court dated 31.12.2025 (passed in W.P. No.36103 of 2025, directing effect to be given to the DPC proceedings for the Petitioner's promotion), attracting punishment under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.¶17
The court held
On perusal of the original DPC record produced by the Respondents, the Court noticed that there was no recommendation for the Petitioner for promotion/appointment by transfer to the post of Superintendant Grade-I (Gazetted) (the sentence beginning 'there is no recommendation for' at para 32 continues at para 33 with the post specified).ratio¶32

Statutes considered

2 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Contempt of Courts Act 1971Sections 10 to 12¶17
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971Sec.10 to 12¶17

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Interim order dated 31.12.2025 in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.36103 of 2025, the alleged willful non-compliance/violation of which gave rise to this contempt case.¶29
High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati · 31.12.2025
Prior proceeding
In W.P.No.36103 of 2025, the Court passed an interim order directing the Respondents to give effect to the DPC proceedings held in July/August 2025 insofar as the Petitioner is concerned for promotion/appointment by transfer to the post of Superintendant Grade-I (Gezetted); the order was not complied with, prompting this contempt case.¶30
Prior proceeding
Respondents' learned standing counsel produced the original DPC file before the Court, contending that no recommendation was made insofar as the Petitioner is concerned.¶31
Prior proceeding
After perusal of the record by the Court and the Petitioner's counsel, the original DPC record was returned to the learned counsel for the Respondents.¶35

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
K R SURYANARAYANA, S/O K.V.N. SARMA (LATE), Superintendent at O/O Chief Commissioner of State Tax (CCST), Kunchanapalli, Gunturu District, Andhra Pradesh¶10
KANDERI CHETHAN
respondent
PIYUSH KUMAR IAS, Principal Secretary, Dept. of Commercial Tax (Finance), Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Amaravati¶13
RAMALINGESWARA RAO KOCHARLA KOTA
respondent
A BABU IAS, Chief Commissioner of State Tax (CCST), Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Kunchanapalli, Tadepalle, Andhra Pradesh¶14
RAMALINGESWARA RAO KOCHARLA KOTA

Coram

AI extract

Nyapathy Vijayauthor¶7

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Andhra Pradesh HC
Decided on: 13 Jul 2026 · July
Registered: 13 Feb 2026
Case no.: CC/667/2026
CNR: APHC010072792026
Topic: Contempt of Court
Bench: Nyapathy Vijay
Disposal: CLOSED NO COSTS
Case type: Contempt Case

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Nyapathy Vijay

C. Rama Krishnappa Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
12 Jul 2026
A.Venkatarao Vs The State of A.P
12 Jul 2026
Syed. Karimullah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
12 Jul 2026
Devarapalli Ramakrishna Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
13 Jul 2026
G. Mekalaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
13 Jul 2026
Dr. T. Surya Manga Devi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh
13 Jul 2026

Cite this judgement

K R Suryanarayana v. Piyush Kumar IAS, CC/667/2026 (AP), decided on 13 July 2026.

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes2

Contempt of Courts Act 1971Sections 10 to 12
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971Sec.10 to 12

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Interim order dated 31.12.2025 in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.36103 of 2025, the alleged willful non-compliance/violation of which gave rise to this contempt case.High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati · 31.12.2025
In W.P.No.36103 of 2025, the Court passed an interim order directing the Respondents to give effect to the DPC proceedings held in July/August 2025 insofar as the Petitioner is concerned for promotion/appointment by transfer to the post of Superintendant Grade-I (Gezetted); the order was not complied with, prompting this contempt case.
Respondents' learned standing counsel produced the original DPC file before the Court, contending that no recommendation was made insofar as the Petitioner is concerned.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Nyapathy Vijay

Parties & counsel