Disposed¶24

M Prasad v. Dr. T.K. Sreedevi

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Sections 10 to 12

Telangana HC25 Apr 2025CC/539/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court, CC No.539 of 2025, M Prasad v. Dr. T.K. Sreedevi and another (Pulla Karthik, J., 25.04.2025): contempt case under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 filed by a contract worker of Khammam Municipal Corporation alleging willful disobedience of the writ order dated 06.11.2024 in W.P. No.32454 of 2022; compliance proceedings dated 29.03.2025 noted as undisputed; contempt case closed without costs with liberty to challenge those proceedings. Keywords: contempt closed, compliance, Khammam Municipal Corporation, liberty to challenge, Government Pleader Services-I.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Case closed without costs; liberty granted to the petitioner to challenge the proceedings dated 29.03.2025 (Roc.No.C/IKMC/4361/2025) issued by Respondent No.2. ¶24

M Prasad Vs Dr. T.K. Sreedevi — Contempt of Court | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁰¹ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDER,/Ieno

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FI FTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND ANNb rwervrv rrve

¶4

PRESEilIT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSNCE PULLA KARTHIK

¶6

CONTEMPT CASE N : 539 OF 2025

¶7

Contempt Case filed Under Sections 10 lo 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondents herein for ilfully disobeying of the Orders of the High Court dated 06/1 1/2024 passed in WP o.32454 ol 2022

¶8

Between:

¶9

M Prasad, S/o Laxmana Dasu, Aged [8^{years, Occ Contract Worker,O/o} Municipal Commissioner, Khammam Mfunicipal^{Corpn, Head waterworks,} Danavayigudem, Khammam Corporation

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

'1 . Dr. T.K. Sreedevi, The Commissioner nd Director Municipal Administration Hyderabad T S +

¶13

Sri Abhishek Augustya, The Commissi + ner, Khammam, Khammam Municipal Corporation

¶14

...CONTEMNORS

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI ABDUL M KHAN Counsel forthe Respondents: GP FOR SE FVICES I

¶16

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶17

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

¶18

CONTEMPT CASE No.539 of2O25

¶19

ORDER:

¶20

Alleging u,illful disobedience of the order dated 06.1 1.2024 passed by this CourL in W.P. No.32454 ol 2024, the present Contempt Case is fi1ed.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services-l appearing for R- 1 and Smt. R.Madhavilatha, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for R-2.

¶22

When thc matter is takcn up for hearing, L:arned Standing Counsel submits that in compliance of the order datcd 06.ll.2}24 passed by this Courl in W.P.No.32454 of 2024, R-2 had issued proceedings vide Roc.No.C t IKMC / 4361 /2025, dated 29.O3.2025.

¶23

4l The above rrade submission is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, hc seeks tiberty to the petitioner to challenge the proccedings dated 29 .O3 .2025.

¶24