Disposed

Tirmalamma v. Sri Koya Sree Harsha

Telangana HC18 Oct 2024CC/1495/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt case alleging violation of a writ direction to consider an online application. The respondent filed counter showing he passed a rejection order in compliance. The court held there was no willful or deliberate violation and closed the contempt case with liberty to challenge the rejection order.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed; liberty granted to petitioner to challenge rejection order dated 21.07.2023 by filing fresh writ petition.

Tirmalamma Vs Sri Koya Sree Harsha — Contempt of Court | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

I³¹⁶⁸ l

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FORTHE^{STATEOFTELANGANAAT HYDERABAD}

¶3

FRIDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

coNTEMPT CASE NO: 1495 OF 2023

¶7

Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt^{of Courts Act 1971to punish} the Respondent herein for their^{willful disobedienceand violationof the orders of} this Honourable Court^{passedrn W P No.6200/2023, dated0910312023}

¶8

Betvveen:

¶9

Tirmalamma, D/o Borra Chinnappa,^Aged about^{28 years, Occ- Agriculture,Rio} Tirmalapur, Narayanapet Mandal, Narayanapet^Dist.

¶10

.,.PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

Sri Koya Sree Harsha, S/o Not known^{petitionerThe District Collector} Narayanpet Dist At Narayanpet

¶13

...RESPONDENT

¶14

Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. NAMBI^KRISHNA

¶15

Counsel for the Respondent: AGP^{FOR REVENUE}

¶16

The Court made the following:^ORDER:-

¶17

r I I \ t

¶18

r l : : i II I I

¶19

-I'HE HON BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶20

CONI ENIPT CASE No.1495 OF 2023

¶21

ORDT]R:

¶22

lleard Sri \anrL i Krishrra. learned counsel fbr the petitioner and lealuecl Asst.Gor t.I)lea,.ler tirr l{evenue

¶23

This Conterxpt Case is filed alleging willful and deliberate violation of the order lated 09.03.2023 in W.P.N0.6200 of 2023. Yide aforesaid order, this Court disposed ofthe said writ petition directing the respondent to conside' online application vide Id.No.LM230000l3'77, dated20.02.2023 subnitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with lari by putting the petitioner and all ef'fected pafties on notice and affordirg them an opportunity of hearing, within eight (08) rveeks liom rhe clate of receipt of a copy of the said orcier'.

¶24

I{cspoudcnts ras llled counter contending that in compiiance u'ith the said orcler, he has passed the orclers dated 21.01 .2023 rejecting the online application submitted by the petitioner.

¶25

Sri Nambi Krishna, leamed counsel appearing fbr the petitioner, on instructicns, would submit that the respondent has not assigned any reasons in the said order while rejecting his application. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the said rejection order dated

¶26

¶27

21.07.2023, he^{has to challengethe sanle by tiling fi'esh writ petition'} The scope of contempt^{is vely lirnitcd.}

¶28

As cliscussed^{supra,the rcspondent has alreadyconrplied r'"ith} the order. dated^{09.03.2021 in w.P.No.(r300 of' 2021. lo punish tlre} contemnor under Section^{l2 ol'the Contcrnptol CoutlsAct. thcreshall} be willful and deliberate^{violation of the order,but in the presentcase,} there is no violation of^{the order much less willfuland deliberate} violation.

¶29

In the light of the^{above, this contemptcase is closed'} However, liberty is^{granted to the petitionerto challengethe rejection} order dated^{21 .07 .2023.}

¶30

Consequently,^{miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this}

¶31

Contempt Case, shall^standclosed'

¶32

Sd/. B. SATYAVATHI DEPUTY REGISTRAR i/TRUE COPY// / g,' SECTION OFFICER

¶33

To,

¶34

One CC to SRI NAMBI KRISHNA Advocate [OPUC]

¶35

Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State of Tetangana at Hyderabad. [OUT].

¶36

Two C.D. Copies VGS/gh

HIGH COURT

DATED:18110112024

ORDER

CC.No.1495 of 2023

:,
.s 7i*i
N^<br>a'/
\1
l:* tP 'l)l

¶42

THE CONTEMFT CASE IS CLOSED.

¶43

¶44

/h /tq <P

Tirmalamma v. Sri Koya Sree Harsha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tirmalamma v. Sri Koya Sree Harsha

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

M/s Mekka Madina Trust for Education and another Vs Union of India ans 2 Others

Mohammed Mustafa Khan Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Faqruddin Vs The State of Telangana

Siliveru Thirupathi Vs The State of Telangana

Dr. K. Mamatha, Vs State of Telangana

Smt.N.Seshamma Vs The state of Telangana and 3 others