M.Satyanarayana Reddy, Karimnagar Dist. v. Raghubir Narayan, Adilabad Dist.

Telangana HC8 Sept 2023CC/1379/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble High Court of Telangana disposed of a contempt case filed for non-compliance with an earlier interim order. In view of pending Supreme Court proceedings, the contempt case was closed with liberty to the petitioner to seek reopening.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Case closed; liberty granted to petitioner to request re-opening after disposal of pending SLP before Supreme Court.

M.Satyanarayana Reddy, Karimnagar Dist. Vs Raghubir… — Contempt of Court | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

I --',
;r
t:t'
t t.'
.{HIGH COURT ., FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
I, ATHYDERABAD
I +-. ,,1S i
i . FRIDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
I TwoTHoUSANDANDTWENTYTHREE
iFrf 1 . .t ..:
', { "1 ,: PRESENT
'1 { . t,.:r;:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J,SREENIVAS RAO
't.
t3:{' t' ' I :ir,h. ., 'lj';r
:t
.:
courin,Ipr CASE NO: 1379 0F 2016
,i,I
Contempt Case filed Under Sections 1O lo 12 of Contempt of Courts Act
to punish ttie Respondent herein for willfully and deliberately non complying
r. ll r t!'. rtrgt "1 11, -'
the Orde rjof th'e High.Court dated 26.04.2016 in W.P.M.P.No.'13549 of 2016 in
f,$i I' ld,,i€ i
, ..i
Betnriee n &r:**
W.P.No.1,#{
M.Satyanatayana:Reddfl S/o late M.Ananta Reddy Aged about 50 years Occ HC
CISF No.,.85450096,,, ClSF.. Unit Singareni Company Collieries Ltd Rl/o Revelly
, Ramaguhdam mandal Kari mnagar district
rl I {'{, ! ...PETITIONER
AND
3l l * dN I
(..#
{r I
Raghu bir Naiayin, aged'about 38 years, Commandent CISF unit, Singareni
, Company Collieries Ltd Srirampur Area, Adilabad District.
i' ...RESPONDENT
'l t ': .. . i. )f. .. 1.
, Counsel forlhi Petitioner: SRl. RAVI KUMAR VADLAKONDA
| ' )
Gounsel for hi Respondent : SRI GADI PRAVEENKUMAR
I ;,1:i, ';. DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA
I
. t. t
e Court ma ef the foltowing: ORDER I
!I.,
i
t
'itIi
,...,. i:'
;l
t.
l
ti
a
;
. .t:
,l_ i:ia

¶2

t I

¶3

¶4

HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE J. SREENruAS RAO

¶5

CONTEMPI CASE No. 1379 of2OL6

¶6

ORDER

¶7

This Contempt Case is l-rled by the petitioner invoking the provisions of Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondents for non-implementation of the interim order granted by this Court in W.P.M.P.No.13549 of 2Ol6 in W.P.No. 10762of 2016, dated 26.O4.20t6.

¶8

Heard Sri Vadalakonda Ravi Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents.

¶9

Learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents submits that questioning the interim order, the respondents frled Writ Appeal before Division Bench of this Court and sarne was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents hled SLP(C) No. 1684 ol 2Ol7 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court granted interim stay and the said SLP is pending.

¶10

¶11

,.l I

¶12

In view of the above said submission, Contempt

¶13

Case is closed granting liberty to the petitioner to make a

¶14

request for re-open of the Contempt Case after disposal of

¶15

the SLP before the Honble Supreme Court.

¶16

Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed

¶17

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall

¶18

stand closed.

¶19

i
Sd/. CH.VENKATESHWARLU
:,1 .a i' '. DEPUIT.REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY// (s
.',It, SECTiON OFFICER
I
To II
'1 . One CC to Sri Ravi Kumar Vadlakonda, Advocate (OPUC)
2. One CC to Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar,. Deputy Solictior General of lndia
(oPuc)
3. Two D uopre
Ks .::::. ST xt;
$.
,: 't-
J- :r:31 ,:.
t-
.rs ;
r t'
f
i.,. . . -.i.
rt: l
',
...., t l
''r':;tl *tt
I
.t ii

¶20

,itl ';* i t,. :#t i .),, IG H COU RT tr,'f,i t: ir'j': ' rl -:: :;: a.': ': :' 'I t-tt o 0912023 C * I I Itl .,.:,. ,: i : ,r t il 'I I ,,'r' tiit II ii . t ,l:1 :. '.:: . 0 RDE iit' I 1 c: No 79 ot 2016 ! : I I fi II d j I I i. t.,,t: * ;, .::j.,a: 1 't ..,' 7:-! stn nf' empt Case ts. :, !'<sup>j -J{.:'" :i,

¶21

'../-...
,/,'.'i't
t
12 o[1 ?m
'e)
,,'/,

M.Satyanarayana Reddy, Karimnagar Dist. v. Raghubir Narayan, Adilabad Dist.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Satyanarayana Reddy, Karimnagar Dist. v. Raghubir Narayan, Adilabad Dist.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.Subash Reddy Vs The District Collector, Medak District at Sangareddy.

Shika Venkata Lakshmi, Khammam Dist. Vs Prl. Secy., Electricity Dept. and 4 Ors.

V.Ramanujam S/o.Rajaiah, Vs The State of Telangana

K Satyanarayana and 3 Othrs Vs Prl.Secy., Social Welfare Dept., Hyd., and 2 Others

R. Ramchandraiah Vs Sri Mahesh Dattu Akka

T. Chiranjeevi, Vs Sri G.V. Ramana Rao