Contempt case alleging violation of a writ order directing due process for NH-65 land acquisition. Respondents disclosed they had filed a review application in the writ petition; the court closed the contempt proceedings, leaving petitioners free to raise all grounds including maintainability in the review.
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.
[32s6 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY ,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
co NTEMPT CASE NO: 129 OF 2025
Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt ofCourts Act 1971, praying to punish the respondents for his willful, intentional, wantonly and deliberately disobedience of orderspassed by thisHon'ble Court in W.P.No.25292 of 2024, daled 12.09.2024
Between:
...PETlTlONE:RS/ PETITIONERS
AND
...CONTEMNORS/R[:SPONDENTS
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 cPC praying that in the circunrstences stated in the affidavit filed in sup port of the petition, the High Court may be pl :ased pleased to direct delete the r:rrne of NHAI ie., Respondent Nos. 1 :rnd t2 fro "n the array ol Respondents in the pre,sent case.
Counsel for the Petitic,ners:SRl. NARENDAR JALLI
Counsel for the Respc'ndents: SRl. MADISHETTY RAMU (SC FOR NHAJ)
The Court made the following: ORDER
I I
:/
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
CONTEMPT CASE No.129 OF 2025
ORDER:
This contempt case is filed alleging wilful and deliberate violation on the part of the respondents in complying with the order dated 12.09.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.25292 of 2024.
This Court, vide its order dated 12.09.2024, whlle disposing of the writ petition, directed the respondents to follow due procedure in accordancc with law, if the lands of lhe petitioners are requircd for the purpose of expansion/ formation/renovation of existing 100 feet National Highway No.65.
Mr. Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein submits that the writ petition has been disposed of based on the oral submissions made at the stage of admission, but after verifrcation of the entire record, respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein frled a review application in the writ petition.
In view of the same, the contempt case is closed. It is left open to the petitioners to raise all the grounds in the revierv application including its maintainabilitl'.
2
Pcntling niscelianeous applications, if any,shall stand
closed
//TRUE COPYII
SI)/- N. SRIHARI EPUN' REGISTRAR
To,
SECI IoN oFFIcER
1 One CC to iSRl NIARENDAR JALLT Advocate [OpUC] 2. One CC to SRI l/ADISHETTY RAMU (SC FOR NHA|) Advocar: [OUT] 3. Two CD Copie-.r
MY/gh
5
t
HIGH COURT
DATED:1110412O25
ORDER
CC.No.129 ot 2O25
. Trtt: g;
k
0lJ,.2tZ5 2
c :)
CONTEMPT IS CLOSED
@48 3F{
1 issue framed by the court
Whether respondents wilfully violated the order dated 12.09.2024 in W.P.No.25292 of 2024 regarding land acquisition procedure for NH-65 expansion.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
D. Ramulu
D. Manohar
D. Ravinder
D. Vijay Bhaskar
P. Nasimhulu
Masood Miya
C.V. Bhaskar Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
