Dismissed

P.Paradesi Naidu v. Sri. Srinivasa Rao

Telangana HC5 Mar 2013CC/37/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petitioner alleged respondent failed to implement an order requiring notice of a General Body meeting regarding disqualification under the Andhra Pradesh Co-Operative Societies Act. Respondent offered an apology citing administrative exigencies and noted publication of notices. Court accepted reasons and closed the case.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed upon acceptance of respondent's apology for delay in implementing the order.

P.Paradesi Naidu Vs Sri. Srinivasa Rao — Cooperative Societies | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶2

CONTEMPT CASE No.37 of 2013

¶3

Dated 05.03.2013

¶4

Between: P.Paradesi Naidu

¶5

…Petitioner

¶6

And Sri Srinivasa Rao

¶7

…Respondent

¶8

Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Kasa Jaganmohan Reddy

¶9

Counsel for the respondent: Sri O.Manohar Reddy for Sri P.Srinivas Rao

¶10

The Court made the following:

¶11

ORDER:

¶12

This Contempt Case is filed alleging wilful disobedience of order dated 10.10.2012 in W.P.No.28623 of 2012 by the respondent.

¶13

By the above-mentioned order, this Court has

¶14

issued a direction to the respondent and others to place the issue as to whether respondent No.4 therein has incurred disqualification under Section 21-A(1)(a) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-Operative Societies Act, 1964 before the General Body of Ankapalli Rural Electrical Co-Operative Society Limited (for short ‘the society’) within one month from the date of receipt of the order. Alleging that the said order has not been complied with, the petitioner in W.P.No.28623 of 2012 has filed this Contempt Case.

¶15

The respondent filed a counter affidavit, wherein it is inter alia stated that due to certain administrative exigencies, he could not convene the meeting as per the direction of this Court and that as the members of the society are huge, to avoid expenditure of Rs.10,00,000/- in sending individual notices, a paper publication was issued on 28.02.2013 in all Telugu news papers informing the members of the society that General Body meeting is scheduled to be held on 29.03.2013, wherein one of the items of the agenda is the disqualification of respondent No.4 in the said writ petition. The respondent has offered unconditional apology for not implementing the abovementioned order within the time limit stipulated by this Court.

¶16

In view of the corrective steps taken by the respondent for implementation of the above-mentioned order of this Court, though belatedly, while accepting the reasons pleaded by him for the delay in the implementation, the Contempt Case is closed.

¶17

C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

¶18

05^th March, 2013

¶19

gra/DR

P.Paradesi Naidu v. Sri. Srinivasa Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Paradesi Naidu v. Sri. Srinivasa Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The A.P. Power General Employees Union, Vs Mr. K.Vijayanand

Kondlapudi Sankar Reddy Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Smt.Addaguduru Lalitha, Vs The Sub-Collector

M. Thirupalaiah Chetty, Vs D.K. Srinivasa Rao (Died per L.R.)

Tammana Sai Rama Rao, S/o. Sriramulu Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Mohammed Akbari, Vs Inspector General of Stamp and Registration, State of