Dismissed

Bommakanti Venkavva v. Y.P. Ojha

Telangana HC4 Apr 2014CC/472/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petitioner alleged violation of a court order regarding renewal of Freedom Fighters' pension. Court held that since the earlier judgment did not validate the certificates, the rejection did not violate the order, though the rejection itself was not upheld.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach appropriate authority to question the rejection order.

Bommakanti Venkavva Vs Y.P. Ojha — Contempt of Court | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.472 of 2014 Date:04.04.2014

¶2

Between:

¶3

Bommakanti Venkavva, W/o Late Hanmandlu

¶4

..... Petitioner

¶5

And

¶6

Y.P.Ojha, Under Secretary, Govt of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi.

¶7

.....Respondent

¶8

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K.Jagadishwar Reddy

¶9

Counsel for the respondent: Ms Masineni Rameswari For Sri P.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy Assistant Solicitor General

¶10

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶11

This Contempt Case is filed alleging willful disobedience of order, dated 05.03.2013, in Writ Petition No.6387 of 2013.

¶12

A perusal of the above-mentioned order would show that this Court while finding fault with the respondents for insisting on production of Personal Knowledge Certificates (PKCs) of the co-prisoners other than the PKC issued by one Donakonda Gopal Reddy, directed the respondent herein to reconsider the petitioner’s claim for grant of freedom fighters’ pension, without insisting on a fresh PKC, and communicate the decision to the latter within two months.

¶13

Purporting to comply with the said order, the respondent has sent communication, dated 01.07.2013, to the Principal Secretary, Revenue (FF-II) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, with copies marked to the District Collector, Karimnagar and the petitioner, wherein the petitioner’s claim, after reconsideration, was rejected.

¶14

A perusal of the said order would show that the respondent has considered the PKC issued by Donakonda Gopal Reddy and the Co-Freedom Fighters Certificates (CFCs) issued by K.P.Ellaiah and Avunuri Machaiah and rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the said certificates do not contain the specific details of the cases which necessitated underground/boarder camp suffering.

¶15

Sri K.Jagadishwar Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioner, stated that the instant rejection is the third one in succession and that the respondent, who appeared to be determined to reject the petitioner’s application for one reason or the other, has passed the above-noted order in order to over reach the abovementioned order passed by this Court.

¶16

This Court in its order, dated 05.03.2013, in Writ Petition No.6387 of 2013, has not rendered findings on the correctness or otherwise of the PKC issued by Donakonda Gopal Reddy. On the contrary, this Court has found fault with the respondent in not considering the PKC issued by Donakonda Gopal Reddy on the ground that the author of the said certificate was no more. The respondent was, therefore, under obligation to consider the contents of the PKC and other relevant certificates to examine the claim of the petitioner. If on such examination, the respondent found that the certificates relied upon by the petitioner were bereft of

¶17

relevant details, he was entitled to reject the latter’s claim. Such rejection, therefore, does not constitute violation of order of this Court.

¶18

I, however, hasten to add that this Court is not upholding the order of rejection passed by the respondent. Whether the reasons for rejection of the PKC issued by Donakonda Gopal Reddy and the two CFCs issued by K.P.Ellaiah and Avunuri Machaiah are correct or not does not fall within the realm of this Contempt Case. If the petitioner feels aggrieved by the order of rejection passed by the respondent, he is entitled to avail appropriate remedy for questioning the said order.

¶19

Leaving the petitioner with the liberty to question the rejection order, the Contempt Case is dismissed.

¶20

__________________________ JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY 04^th April 2014 DR

Bommakanti Venkavva v. Y.P. Ojha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bommakanti Venkavva v. Y.P. Ojha

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 Official Liquidator Vs -

The Official Liquidator Vs -

The Official Liquidator Vs -

Bontha Abraham Vs Smt.Ch.Vijayalakshmi

Smt.Pemmasani Radhamma Vs Sri S.Solomon Arokiaraj, IAS

B. Poornachandra Reddy Vs Sri Ramgopal, I.A.S.