Dismissed

Thatta Sudhakar, v. Sri. M.T.Krishna Babu, I.A.S

Telangana HC23 Jan 2023CC/738/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana, in Contempt Case No. 738 of 2013, observed that the petitioner was absent for three consecutive hearings (filed in 2013, heard in 2022). Concluding the petitioner was not interested, the Court closed the contempt case but left an option to file a fresh application if the contempt survives.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Case closed; liberty to move fresh application if contempt survives; miscellonous petitions pending, if any, to stand closed.

Thatta Sudhakar, Vs Sri. M.T.Krishna… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 738 OF 2013

¶7

Contempt Case under Sections 10 lo 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 to punish the respondents for willfully violating the order dated.21 .12.2012 passed in W.P.No.39241 OF 2012.

¶8

Between:

¶9

Thatta Sudhakar S/o. Mallesh, Aged 40 years, Occ: Busrness, Rio. H. No. 122, (Upper Quarter), TRT Colony, Vidyanagar, Hyderabad - 44.

¶10

...PETITIONER/PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

'l . Sri. M. T. Krishna Babu, l.A.S,The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund, Hyderabad.

¶13

Sri. M.S.S.Somaraju, The Deputy Commissioner, (Town Planning), Circle lX, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad.

¶14

B. Sayamma, Wo Late. B. Ramanna, Age: Not Known, Fyo. H.No. 121(Lower Quarter), TRT Colony, Vidyanagar, Hyderabad- 500044.

¶15

..RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner(s): SRl. U SHANTHI BHUSHAN RAO^(Not Present)

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents: DR Y. PADMAVATHI^(SC FOR GHMC)

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

¶20

CONTEMPT CASE No.738 of 2013

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

This Contempt Cose is filed olleging violotion of the orders possed by lhis Court in W.P.No.39241 ot 2012, doled 2l .12.2012.

¶23

Todo'r, when the molter is token up for heoring, there is no representoton for the petitioner. On 17.11.2022 olso, lhere is no representotion for the petilioner ond lherefore. the molter wos directed lo ire lisled under lhe copiion 'for dismissol'. The present Conlenrpt C ose is filecl in the yeor 2013 ond it is not odmilted so f or. Theref ore. this Courl is of the considered view thot lhe petitioner is roi interes'ted to pursue this Contempt Cose

¶24

Accor,lingly,^'lhe Contempt Cose is closed. However, ihe pelitioner is ot liberly lo move o fresh opplicotion, if ihe contempl sfil survives.

¶25

As o sr:quel, the miscelloneous pbtilions pending, if ony,

¶26

To,

¶27

sholl slond closed.

¶28

Sd/. K. SAILESHI DEPUTY NACfSTNNN //TRUE COPY// l.fi" SECTION OFFICER

¶29

I I II

¶30

One CC to SRt. U. SHANTHT BHUSHAN RAO, Advocate tOpUCl 2. One CC to SRt. DR. y. PADMAVATHT ( SC FOR GHMC ), Advocate tOpUCl 3. Two CD Copies VH. karnzt-

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2310112023

ORDER

CC.No.738 o'r 2013

1 $E STA}.t
q <br>25 tEB ?tn ,
oo
ii
<br>

¶36

CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE

¶37

(r$U<br>'v7
\9

Thatta Sudhakar, v. Sri. M.T.Krishna Babu, I.A.S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thatta Sudhakar, v. Sri. M.T.Krishna Babu, I.A.S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K. Mamatha Vs The State of Telangana

Koreboina Atchaiah Vs Sri M.T.Krishna Babu

J.C.Francis Vs The State of Telangana

K.Praveen Kumar, Vs C.Krishna Babu

Koppula Raju Vs State of Telangana

Smt.Potti Rajeshwari, Vs Mr.Khader Mohiuddin