Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Y.Kanakaiah Vs Sri Lokesh Kumar D.S., Ias. — Contempt of Court | Telangana HC (2025)

Home
Telangana HC
2025
Y.Kanakaiah Vs Sri Lokesh Kumar D.S., Ias.Y.Kanakaiah v. Sri Lokesh Kumar D.S., Ias.

Disposed¶25

Y.Kanakaiah v. Sri Lokesh Kumar D.S., Ias.

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Sections 10–12

Telangana HC21 Feb 2025CC/2095/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Y. Kanakaiah, a sweeper on deputation at ZPHS (B) Kondapaka, Siddipet District, filed Contempt Case No.2095 of 2024 before the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (Pulla Karthik, J.) under Sections 10–12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department and the Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural Employment, alleging non-implementation of the final orders dated 29-11-2023 in W.P.No.32637 of 2023. By order dated 21-02-2025, the Court recorded the Government Pleader's statement that the petitioner's representation was considered and his claim for enhancement of minimum time scale rejected vide speaking order No.83/08/2024, a submission not seriously disputed, and closed the contempt case without costs with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Case closed without costs, granting liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies, if he so desires.

Why is it important?

The Court recorded the Government Pleader's submission that, in compliance of the order dated 29.11.2023 in W.P.No.32637 of 2023, the respondents considered the petitioner's representation and rejected his claim for enhancement of payment of minimum time scale vide speaking order No.83/08/2024; the submission was not seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. ¶23

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt Case closed without costs, granting liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies, if he so desires.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents willfully disobeyed the final orders dated 29-11-2023 in W.P.No.32637 of 2023 so as to warrant punishment under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Court's answer

The Court recorded the Government Pleader's submission that, in compliance of the order dated 29.11.2023 in W.P.No.32637 of 2023, the respondents considered the petitioner's representation and rejected his claim for enhancement of payment of minimum time scale vide speaking order No.83/08/2024; the submission was not seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Ratio / Principle

Recording the above submissions, the Contempt Case is closed, granting liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies if he so desires; no costs, and pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Sections 10–12 — Alleged willful disobedience of final orders dated 29-11-2023 in W.P.No.32637 of 2023 concerning enhancement of minimum time scale — Government Pleader for Services-II submitted that in compliance the petitioner's representation was considered and rejected vide speaking order No.83/08/2024 — submission not seriously disputed by petitioner's counsel — Contempt Case closed without costs, granting liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies.

A

[³³⁰¹ ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE^{STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

FRIDAY, THE TWENry FIRST^{DAYOF FEBRUARY} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{PULLA KARTHIK}

CONTEM PT CASE NO: 2095^{OF 2024}

Contempt Case under Section¹⁰ lo^{12 of Contempt of CourtsAct, 1971to} punish the Respondents herein for willfully^committing. -contemp^t-^innot implementing and obeying the^{Final ordersof this Court dated 29-11-2023passed} in W.P.No.32637 of 2023

Between:

Y.Kanakaiah, S/o. Ramalingaiah.^{aged 50 years Occ: Sweeper,Primary-Sctrool,} Kukunoorpaliy (Mandal), S-rddipet^{District,on deputation working at ZPHS (B)} Kondapaka, Siddipet District.

...PETITIONER

AND

1 Sri Lokesh Kumar D.S.,^{lAS., Principal Secretary, Panchayathraj Department,} Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad.

Smt. Anita Ramachandran,^{lAS., Commissioner'Panchayathra.iand Rural} Employment, Urdu Galli, Himayathnagar,^Hyderabad.

... RESPONDENTS

Counsel for the Petitioner :SRl GURRAM^SRINIVAS

Counsel for the Respondents: GP^{FORSERVICESll}

The Court made the following:^ORDER

--7

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

CONTEMPT CASE No.2O95 of 2024

ORDER:

This Contempt Case, under Sections lO to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, is filed seeking to punish the contemnor/respondent for willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.32637 of 2023 dated 29. 11.2023.

Today, u,hen the matter is taken up for hearing, Iearned Government Pleader for Services-lI appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that in compliance of the order dated 29.11.2023 passed by this Court in W.p.No.32 637 of 2023, the respondents considered the representation of the petitioner and rejected his claim for enhancement of payment of minimum time scale vide speaking order No. 83 / 0 8 / 2024 d.ated, 2Z .O t.2024.

The above made submission is not seriously dispured by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

Recording the above made submissions, the Contempt Case is closed granting liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies, if he so desires

2

PK,J

s

C.C.No.2095^{of 2024}

if an-v,^{shall stand closedNo} Pending^{miscellaneous Petitions'}

COStS.

sd'-^t ilfiGJlLJlsrs# /ITRUE^COPY// ECTIoN^oEFlcER

To, of rerangana^at i ?ffi 33Jf5t?'ffiiBuyf,#;t:1i Hvderabad^[OUT] "::'Y:1""

"::'Y:1""

Two^{CD CoPies}

ADK/DLw

L

HIGH COURT

DATED:21 10212025

ORDER

CC.No.2095 of 2024

g STA rc..
t
Ct
i zo t{AI 2uz5
-b
)
t oEli i>nrC

CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE WITHOUT COSTS

G ,P(d &@

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the respondents willfully disobeyed the final orders dated 29-11-2023 in W.P.No.32637 of 2023 so as to warrant punishment under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.¶22
The court held
The Court recorded the Government Pleader's submission that, in compliance of the order dated 29.11.2023 in W.P.No.32637 of 2023, the respondents considered the petitioner's representation and rejected his claim for enhancement of payment of minimum time scale vide speaking order No.83/08/2024; the submission was not seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.ratio¶23

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971Sections 10 to 12¶22

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Final orders dated 29-11-2023 in W.P.No.32637 of 2023 passed by this Court, whose non-implementation was alleged as willful contempt; not an order under challenge but the order whose obedience was sought.¶22
High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad · 29-11-2023
Prior proceeding
Alleged non-implementation of the final orders dated 29-11-2023 in W.P.No.32637 of 2023, forming the basis of the contempt allegation.¶7
Prior proceeding
Filing of the present Contempt Case under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 seeking punishment of the respondents for willful disobedience.¶22
Prior proceeding
Government Pleader for Services-II submitted that in compliance of the order dated 29.11.2023 in W.P.No.32637 of 2023, the respondents considered the petitioner's representation and rejected his claim for enhancement of payment of minimum time scale vide speaking order No.83/08/2024 (date illegible in source); submission not seriously disputed by petitioner's counsel.¶23

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Y. Kanakaiah¶9
Gurram Srinivas
respondent
Sri Lokesh Kumar D.S., IAS¶12
Government Pleader for Services-II
respondent
Smt. Anita Ramachandran, IAS¶13
Government Pleader for Services-II

Coram

AI extract

Pulla Karthik, J.author¶19

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Telangana HC
Decided on: 21 Feb 2025 · February
Registered: 5 Oct 2024
Case no.: CC/2095/2024
CNR: HBHC010541462024
Topic: Contempt of Court
Bench: Pulla Karthik
Disposal: CLOSED NO COSTS
Case type: Contempt Case

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Pulla Karthik

R Roopa Vs The State of Telangana
20 Feb 2025
A. Christopher Vs The State of Telangana
20 Feb 2025
Rathod Vilas Vs State of Telangana
20 Feb 2025
M/s. Pragathi Urban Rural Development Society Vs The Nizamabad Municipal Corporation
21 Feb 2025
Mudigonda Shirisha Vs Smt Mallaiah Bhattu
21 Feb 2025
Katroth Hari Vs Dr. a Sharath
21 Feb 2025

Cite this judgement

Y.Kanakaiah v. Sri Lokesh Kumar D.S., Ias., CC/2095/2024 (TEL), decided on 21 February 2025.

The High Court for the State of Telangana publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971Sections 10 to 12

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Final orders dated 29-11-2023 in W.P.No.32637 of 2023 passed by this Court, whose non-implementation was alleged as willful contempt; not an order under challenge but the order whose obedience was sought.High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad · 29-11-2023
Alleged non-implementation of the final orders dated 29-11-2023 in W.P.No.32637 of 2023, forming the basis of the contempt allegation.
Filing of the present Contempt Case under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 seeking punishment of the respondents for willful disobedience.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Pulla Karthik, J.

Parties & counsel