The Court dismissed a contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of an order directing removal of dumped material. It held that the existing electric poles, erected in the 1970s, were not included in the direction to remove dumped material, thus finding no contumacy.
The contempt case was dismissed; no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
CONTEMPT CASE No.1963 of 2014
ORDER:
This contempt case was filed alleging willful disobedience to the order dated 08.07.2013 passed by this Court in W.P.No.21716 of 2012. By the said order, the Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited was directed not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner society over the land in Survey No.218 of Podili Village and Mandal, Prakasam District, and remove the material dumped thereon,
if not already removed, forthwith.
The first respondent filed additional counter-affidavit dated 09.11.2015 stating that the material dumped in the subject land has been removed in compliance with the order passed by this Court. As regards the electric poles, he stated that the same were erected at the time of commissioning of substations in the 1970s and that they have been in existence for the last 45 years.
Sri K. Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, would concede that the material dumped has been removed but would further contend that the said electric poles also require to be removed. This Court is however of the opinion that the direction to remove the material dumped on the land would not include the poles standing in the said land which are stated to have been erected long ago. This Court therefore finds no disobedience, much less willful disobedience, made out warranting exercise of contempt jurisdiction.
The contempt case is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
____________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR Date:17.06.2016 GJ
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the removal direction in the impugned order included electric poles erected decades ago.
Whether the facts established amount to willful disobedience warranting contempt jurisdiction.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner Society
Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited
Sanjay Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
