Dismissed

Siddagani Blkshapati v. Sri Somesh Kumar, I.A.S. and 3 Others

Telangana HC5 Nov 2021CC/754/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt case under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the petitioner alleged that respondents violated a High Court order protecting his land possession. The Court found that regarding acquired land, the Government was in possession, and there was no evidence of willful violation regarding the specific non-acquired lands by the respondents.

What did the court decide?

The contempt case was closed; the petitioner is left open to prosecute the pending writ petition.

Siddagani Blkshapati Vs Sri Somesh Kumar, I.A.S. and 3… — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERAB,AD

¶2

FRIDAY ,THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P NAVEEN RAO

¶5

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 754 OF 2020

¶6

Contempt Case under Sections 10 lo 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 to punish the respondent herein for willfully violating the Order of the High Court dated 22-08-2019 passed in W.P.No. 18240 oI 2015 .

¶7

BctlveenI

¶8

Siddagani Bikshapati, S/o Poshaiah, Aged about 68 years, Occ. Agriculture, Fl/o Thalla Vellemla Village, Chityala [/andal, Nalgonda District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

Sri Somesh Kumar, l.A.S., Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.

¶12

Sri Prashanth Jeevan Patil, District Collector, Nalgonda District, Nalgonda, Telangana State.

¶13

Sri Jagadishwar Reddy, Revenue Divisional Officer, Chityala Division, Nalgonda District.

¶14

Sri Garlapati Krishna Reddy, Tahsildar, Chityala Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner :SRl. RAPOLU BHASKAR

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents NO.1 to 4: G.P. FOR REVENUE

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

¶20

i I

¶21

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶22

(

¶23

qONTEMPT CASE No.754 o

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

On 22.08.2019, in W.P.No.l824O of 2019, direction was issued to the respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the land in Survey Nos.130, 131, 132 and 160 of Thalla Vellemla Village of Chityal Mandal, Nalgonda District, provided the petitioner was not already dispossessed. Alleging that the said orders are violated and the respondents are trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject lands, without following due process, this contempt case is filed.

¶26

In the counter-affidavit deposed by Sri M.Ikishna Reddy working as Tahsildar, Chityal Mandal, it is stated that in Survey No. 134, total extent of land is Acs.8.16 guntas. Out of this extent, Acs.5.05 guntas was acquired. This included an extent of Ac.0.34 72 guntas of land acquired from the father of the petitioner. Further, the petitioner's father owns Ac. 1.16 guntas of land in Survey No. 134. After the said acquisition, Ac.0.2172 guntas of land left with the family of the petitioner. Father of the petitioner alienated the balance extent of land and the purchasers have already constructed houses. It, is therefore, asserted that no land is available to the petitioner in Survey No.134. It is further asserted that the respondents are not interfering with the land of the petitioner in Survey Nos. 13O, 131, 132 and 160.

¶27

The averments in the affidavit frled in support of the contempt case itself state that there was an attempt to dispossess and the deponent asserts that he is not interfering with the other

..--

--=:-=.-*

-1

extent of land and to the extent of land acquired only, the Government is in possession. Therefore, it cannot be said that the directions of this Court are violated much less deliberately and willfully warranting initiation of contempt proceedings. 4. The contempt case is accordingly closed, leaving it open to the petitioner to prosecute the pending writ petition. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶32

SD/.C,V.MALLIKARJUNA VARMA DEPUry REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \A.-/ SECTION OFFICER

¶33

¶34

To,

¶35

Sri Somesh Kumar, l.A.S., Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.

¶36

Sri Prashanth Jeevan Patil, District Collector, Nalgonda District, Nalgonda, Telangana State.

¶37

Sri Jagadishwar Reddy, Revenue Divisional Officer, Chityala Division, Nalgonda District.

¶38

Sri Garlapati Krishna Reddy, Tahsildar, Chityala Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶39

Two CCs to G.P. ROE REVENUE(Land Acquisition), High Court for the State^of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶40

One CC to SRl. RAPOLU BHASKAR Advocate IOPUC]

¶41

One CC to SRl. . RAJASRIPATHYRAO, Advocate [OPUC]

¶42

B. Two CD Copies

¶43

One Spare Copy

CDL

HIGH^COURT

DATED:0511112,021

ORDER

CC.No,754 of²⁰²⁰

1
STAT€
I
c
o, 04 Dtt?s?l
r) .t
,!
+ iltt - '

¶51

Closing the contemPt^case

¶52

No costs

¶53

\
\I)n

Siddagani Blkshapati v. Sri Somesh Kumar, I.A.S. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siddagani Blkshapati v. Sri Somesh Kumar, I.A.S. and 3 Others

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

Muderaj Sangam Devapur Vs Y.Vijay Kumar and 2 others

Y. Saradamma Vs Union of India

Smt Kothapalli Rajitha Vs Sri Amoy Kumar IAS

Ganesh Rathod Vs Mr. Smt. Sikta Patnayak

Thota Amani D/o Late Thota Gopal Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its

Kaddoori Mukesh Vs Smt. D. Usha