The High Court of Telangana in a contempt case closed the proceedings after the petitioners submitted that the respondents had complied with a previous order, and the petitioners had withdrawn the original writ petition.
The contempt case was closed without 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESEN T
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 455 OF 202'l
(Contempt Case Under Section 10 lo 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the Respondents herein for wilful disobedience of the Order of the High Court dated '19.02.2021 in W.P.No.4009 ot 2021 .
Between:
...PETITIONER/Writ PETITIONER Nos. 1,2,3,4,6 & 12
in WP NO.4009 OF 2021
AND
...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT No. 4 & 5 in WP No. 4009 ot 2021
Counsel for the Petitioners :SRl. CH RAVI KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondents: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL (TG)
The Court made the following: ORDER
T,TIE E ONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LA]{|SHMAN CONTEMPT CASE No.455 of2O2l
ORDER:
Ms.T. Swecha, learned counsel representing Sri Ch. R: vi Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners would sub nit that the respondents have considered the representalion dated 16-12-2020 submitted by the petitioners herein and passed appropriate orders on 26-04-2021, in accordance with law, in compliance of the order datr.d l9-O2-2O21 passed by this Court in W.P.No,4OC9 of 2O2l . The petitioners hereir:. have taken steps to wihdraw the very W.P.No.4OO9 of 2C2l and filed fresh writ p ]tition challenging the said order.
Recor,ling the said submission, this Contempt Case is closed. N, ) costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if zmy, pending in this Cont:mpt Case, shall stand closed.
I
SD/.MI.VIJAYA BHASKAR //TRUE COPY// JoINT R?qlsrRAR Ct''
To, SECTION OFFICER '1. Sri. P. Venatra na Rr zsrisiffi ;i;;:i;iiltd5"l,3,e?i.?i[H""#H,:J,,,.6:,,olf El?:.,1i:.,ll"?lo,o* ^Authority,Siddi )et District. Siddine J. one CC to Sri the ( )h. Ravi .Kurnar, Advocate tOpUCI t ly.'":r"r:l: ,Advocat'eb;;;;r'i'i,g1;"c'"",ini;rthe stareor reransana at 5. Two CD Cooies 6. One Spare bop y CDIs gbr
SECTION OFFICER
HIGH COURT
DATED:061)712022
ORDER
7 t;
tl,-,,N
'44'
,.Y
i,) sr*\c:<br>u
Ftw g* C:
a
q
\ i.
* ,t
.'-'f-r r .'.,$ -/'
_:-;,
CC.No.455of 2021
CLOSING'IHE( ONTEMPTCASE. NO COSTS.
1
D
I
Mohammed Jeelani and Others
P. Venatrama Reddy
S. Padmakar
K. Lakshman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
