P.V.S.R. Constructions Vs Sri. Shashibhushan Kumar — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

P.V.S.R. Constructions Vs Sri. Shashibhushan Kumar — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether anything survives in Contempt Case No. 972 of 2025, which sought cognizance and punishment of the respondents for violating the orders dated 03.07.2024 passed in W.P No. 12761 of 2024, in view of the reported compliance with the order under contempt.

Court's answer

The order under contempt has already been complied with as per the instructions of the 7th respondent dated 02.01.2026, to be made part of the court record, and the learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the compliance.

Ratio / Principle

Since compliance has been effected and is undisputed, nothing survives in the contempt case; accordingly the contempt case is closed, any interim order is deemed to have been vacated, and there shall be no order as to costs.

Key takeaways

As a sequel to the closure of the contempt case, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Case No. 972 of 2025, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), Justice B Krishna Mohan, decided 02.01.2026. P.V.S.R. Constructions (represented by its Managing Partner, Katasani Hah Prasad Reddy) had filed a petition under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 seeking cognizance of contempt committed by eight respondents (Principal Secretaries of the Panchayath Raj, Finance, and Agricultural and Co-operative Departments; the Commissioner and Director of Agricultural Marketing, Guntur; the Chief Engineer and Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj Circle; the Executive Engineer, PRI Division and PIU Nandyal; and Sri M Vijaya Sunitha, impleaded as Respondent No. 8 on 14.08.2025 vide IA No. 1 of 2025) for violating the orders dated 03.07.2024 passed in W.P No. 12761 of 2024. At hearing, counsel for the respondents submitted that the order under contempt had already been complied with as per the 7th respondent's instructions dated 02.01.2026, and the petitioner's counsel did not dispute this. Holding that nothing survived, the Court closed the contempt case, deemed any interim order vacated, made no order as to costs, and directed that pending miscellaneous petitions stand closed.

APHC010174872025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 972/2025

Between:

P.V.S.R. CONSTRUCTIONS, REP. BY ITS THE MANAGING PARTNER, KATASANI HAH PRASAD REDDY, S/O. SURENDRANATHA REDDY , AGED 48 YEARS, R/O. H.NO. 1- 10, KONDAPURAM VILLAGE, DORNIPADU MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

SRI SHASHIBHUSHAN KUMAR, THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI.

SRI PEEYUSH KUMAR, THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI.

SRI BUDITHI RAJASEKHAR, THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, AGRICULTURAL AND CO OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT AP SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI.

SRI S DILLI RAO, THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURAL MARKETING, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

C V SUBBA REDDY, THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

V RAMA CHANDRA REDDY, THE SUPERINTENDING

2

ENGINEER, PANCHAYATI RAJ CIRCLE, KURNOOL KURNOOL DISTRICT.

K NAGARAJU, THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYATH RAJ PRI DIVISION AND PIU NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT.

SRI M VIJAYA SUNITHA, S/O. NOT KNOWN, AGE NOT KNOWN, THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE MARKETING, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. R 8 IS IMPLEDED AS PER COURT ORDER DT.14.08.2025. VIDE IA NO.1 OF 2025 IN CC NO.972 OF 2025.

...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 may be pleased to take to cognizance the offence of Contempt of Court committed by the respondents herein and to punish them for violating the orders dated 03.07.2024 passed in W.P No. 12761 of 2024 and to pass such

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to implead the proposed respondent as Respondent No. 8 in C.C.No. 972 of 2025 and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.MARELLA RADHA

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

1.

2.BH RAMA KRISHNA NAIK

3

The Court made the following Order:

The learned counsel for the respondents submits that, the order under contempt has already been complied with as per the instructions of the 7^th respondent dated 02.01.2026 which shall be made as part of the court record. The learned counsel for the petitioner also does not dispute the same.

In view of the same, nothing survives in this contempt case and accordingly, it is closed. Interim order if any, deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

_________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

02.01.2026 NNN