Vanaparthy Ramesh Vs Smt.Sujatha — Contempt of Court | Telangana HC (2025)

Vanaparthy Ramesh Vs Smt.Sujatha — Contempt of Court | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt Case closed recording the respondent's claimed compliance; liberty granted to the petitioners to file fresh contempt if cause survives; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions in the contempt case stood closed

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent (Deputy Commissioner, GHMC Circle No. 5, Saroornagar) willfully and deliberately violated the order dated 13.12.2024 in W.P. No. 35161 of 2024

Court's answer

Recording learned counsel for the respondent's submission, supported by the notice of sealing of unauthorized construction dated 13.05.2025 (with photographs and written instructions of the Assistant City Planner, Circle-V, Saroornagar, GHMC) placed on record, that the respondent had already complied with the order under contempt, this Court closed the Contempt Case

Ratio / Principle

Liberty was granted to the petitioners to file a fresh contempt case if the cause survives, and, in the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Case No. 806 of 2025 (K. Lakshman J., High Court for the State of Telangana, decided 11.07.2025) under Sections 10 to 12, Contempt of Courts Act 1971, filed by Vanaparthy Ramesh and Vanaparthy Rupakala — who were respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in W.P. No. 35161 of 2024 — alleging willful and deliberate violation of the order dated 13.12.2024. By that order this Court had directed the Deputy Commissioner, GHMC Circle-V, Saroornagar, to consider the writ petitioner's explanation dated 08.12.2024 to a show-cause notice, act strictly in accordance with law after notice and hearing, within four weeks, and had directed the writ petitioner to construct strictly per the building permit dated 19.08.2024, failing which liberty was given to the respondents to act. None appeared for the petitioners pre-lunch or post-lunch. Counsel for the respondent produced a notice of sealing of unauthorized construction dated 13.05.2025 with photographs and written instructions of the Assistant City Planner, Circle-V, Saroornagar, GHMC, contending compliance, and the copies were placed on record. Recording the said submission, the Court closed the Contempt Case, granted liberty to file fresh contempt if cause survives, made no order as to costs, and closed pending miscellaneous petitions.

[³¹⁶⁸ I

IN THE H]GH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 806 OF 2025

Petition under Sections 10 lo 12 of Contempt of Courts Acl 1971 to punish the respondent for willfully and deliberately disobeying the orders passed in W.P.No. 35161 of 2024 dated 1311212024.

Between:

'l . Vanaparthy Ramesh, s/o Laxmaiah, aged about 60 years, occ, Business Rt/o H. No. 1 6-2-705 I 1 l2l A Anandnagar, Malakpet, Hyderabad.

Vanaparthy Rupakala, w/o Vanaparthy Ramesh aged about 55 years, occ. Housewife R /o H. No. 16-2-7 051 1 l2l A Anand nagar, Malakpet, Hyderabad..

...PETITIONERS

AND

Smt.Sujatha, Wo. not known to the petitioner, Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabd Municipal Corporation, Circle No. 5, Saroornagar, R.R. District,

...CONTEMNOR

Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRl. S RAMESH GUPTA

Counsel for the Respondents: SRINIVAS RAO PACHWA (SC FOR GHMC)

The Court made the following: ORDER

I \

{

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.^LAKSHMAN

CONTEMPT CASE No.806 OF^202:;

ORAL ORDBR

None appears for the^{petitioners, both pre-lunch and post-lunch.}

This Contempt Case is^filed by^{respondert' Nos.4and 5} alleging willtut^{and deliberate violationof order daLe,l 13.12.2024 in} W.P. No.3516l of^2024.

3 Vide the aforesaid^{order,this Courtdisposed t,l'thc said writ} petition directing the^{DeputyCommissioner, GI IN{C. Circle-V,} Saroomagar, Rangareddy^{District, to considerthe ex:lanationdated} 08.12.2024 subrnitted^{by the writ petitioner to the sht , -caus!' notice} dated 0-].12.2024^{and take action strictly in accordan -:,,: with law by} putting the rvrit petitioner and the^{petitionersherci} r^{- respondent} Nos.4 and 5, on^{notice and affording theman opportulrty of hearing.} He shall complete^{the saidexercise within a period of f rr.rr (04)weeks.} This Court also^{directed the writ petitioner to nroceedwith} construction strictly in^{accordance with the buildinli pemrit order} dated 19.08.2024, failing^which liberty^{was granted to t\e rcspondent} hcrein to take action^{against the writpetitioner.}

2

Respondent^{Nos.4 and 5 in the said writ petition filed the} present contempt^{case alteging that the respondentdid not comply} with the said order.

Mr. Srinivas^{Rao Pachwa, leamed counsel appearingfor the} respondent,^{has produced copyof notice of sealing of unauthorized} construction,^{dated 13.05.2025along with photographs and wrinen} instructionofAssistantCityPlanner,Circle-V,Saroornagar'GHMC' to contend^{that the respondent has atready complied with the order} under contempt.^{The said copies are placed on record'}

Recording^{the said submission,this Contempt Caseis} closed. However,^{liberty is granted to the petitioners hereinto file} fresh contempt^{if cause survives. In the circumstancesof the case'} there shall^{be no orderas to costs'}

As a sequel thereto,^{miscellaneouspetitions,if any' pendingin}

the contempt^{case shall stand closed'}

sd/- P.c . NAGABHUSHAMBA EPUTY REGIS

//TRUE COPY//

ECTION OFFICER

To,

One CC to SRl. S RAMESH GUPTAAdvocate [OPU

I

One CC to SRl. SRINIVAS RAO PACHWA (SC FOR GHMC) Advocate loPUcl

.^{3. Two CD Copies}

. D GR,/PSL

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 110712025

ORDER

CG.No.806 of 2025

/_ .::<br>( 'l'
\a
1 ',.)
1tr BIT 795 I
\r1
r).
l
t
Or
i ,. Tr' .1i' I'r

CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE

e
J