A.P. Gram Panchayat Employees and Workers Union, Vs Sri Budithi Rajasekhar

A.P. GRAM PANCHAYAT EMPLOYEES AND WORKERS UNION,, REGISTRATION NO. A-2894, REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY D. VENKAT RAMAIAH, S/O. D. RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS. PUMP OPERATOR-CUM-WATCHMAN, 10-822, SESHAPHIRAN STREET, OMKAR BUILDING, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P.

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

SRI BUDITHI RAJASEKHAR, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, 5TH BLOCK, GROUND FLOOR, ROOM NO. 103, A.P SECRETARIAT OFFICE, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶15

SMT A SURYAKUMARI, THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, D. NO. 12-47, P.V.S. ICON, NEAR PRATUR CROSS ROAD, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P.

¶16

SRI SHAN MOHAN SAGILI I A S, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR.

¶17

SMT T LAKSHMI, THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶18

...CONTEMNOR(S):

¶19

2

¶20

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 take cognizance of the contempt committed by the Contemners/Respondents herein and punish them with maximum imprisonment under Section 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r/w Article 215 of the Constitution of India for utter disobedience and disregard shown to the Final Order passed by the Hon'ble A.P. High Court dated 13.04.2023 passed in W.P. No. 8828 of 2015 and pass

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶22

1.SRINIVASA RAO NARRA

¶23

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

¶24

1.VADAPALLI RAMESH

¶25

The Court made the following:

¶26

3

¶27

ORDER :

¶28

This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for willful, wanton and deliberate disobedience in implementation of the order passed by this Court on 13.04.2023 in W.P.No.8828 of 2015.

¶29

The petitioner has filed the aforesaid writ petition aggrieved by the action of the respondent authorities in removing the names of the members of the petitioners society from the rolls of employment in their respective village Gram Panchayat records vide circular bearing ROC.No.184/2014-B1 (PTS), dated 12.02.2015. This Court, on 13.04.2023, passed the following order:

¶30

“…as the petitioners have been continued in their respective Gram Panchayats and are carrying out their works even as on today, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondents to continue the petitioners in the said Gram Panchayats by maintaining the muster rolls.”

¶31

The 4^th respondent/contemnor filed a counter affidavit stating that upon receipt of the order dated 13.04.2023 passed by this Court, the 4^th respondent vide circular dated 18.07.2023 requested all the panchayat secretaries, sarpanchas, extension officer (PR&RD)/Mandal parishad development officers/divisional panchayat officer to submit proposals for engaging the workers and also to continue the engaged workers for maintenance of sanitation, supply of drinking water, street lighting etc., on contract basis. Thereafter, post sanction orders were also issued to contract workers in Chandragiri, Pakala, Kanipakam, Chowdepalle and V. Kota gram panchayats,

¶32

4

¶33

vide proceedings dated 14.03.2024 of the 3^rd respondent/contemnor. As proposals were not yet received from remaining gram panchayats, post sanction orders could not be issued.

¶34

Heard Sri. Narra Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Vadapalli Ramesh, learned counsel for the respondents/contemnors.

¶35

It can be seen that pursuant to the orders passed by this Court, steps were initiated by the 4^th respondent/contemnor by seeking proposals from all the concerned gram panchayats for engaging the workers and also to continue the engaged workers for maintenance of sanitation, supply of drinking water, street lighting etc., on contract basis. Furthermore, post sanction orders were also issued to contract workers in Chandragiri, Pakala, Kanipakam, Chowdepalle and V. Kota gram panchayats, vide proceedings dated 14.03.2024. However, as no proposals were received from remaining gram panchayats, post sanction orders could not be issued.

¶36

Recording the same, contempt is closed. However, it is left open to contemnors to issue post sanction orders as and when proposals are received. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶37

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶38

Date: 17.07.2026

¶39

Gss

¶40

___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

A.P. Gram Panchayat Employees and Workers Union, v. Sri Budithi Rajasekhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.P. Gram Panchayat Employees and Workers Union, v. Sri Budithi Rajasekhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. D. lqbal Hussain, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kalavakuri Maha Lakshumma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Eluri Sarojanamma Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Neti Ramanjaneyulu Vs I.Sharada

Konisi Trinadharao Vs Subuddhi Ramarao

Tarra Venkataramana Vs Hari Jawahar Lal, I.A.S.