Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 261 (AP)

B. Ashok Naidu v. M. Hari Narayanan

2022-03-04

BATTU DEVANAND

body2022
JUDGMENT Battu Devanand, J. - This Contempt Case has been filed seeking to punish the respondents for willful disobedience in implementing the orders, dated 23.07.2021, passed by this Court in I.a.No.1 of 2020 in W.P.No.20463 of 2020. 2. This Court by order, dated 23.07.2021 in I.a.No.1 of 2020 in W.P.No.20463 of 2020, directed the Respondent authorities not to establish and construct permanent Panchayat Secretariat and Rythu Barosa Kendram building at B.N. Palle by considering the representation, dated 20.12.2020. 3. The present contempt case is filed complaining that the Respondents proceeding with construction by violating the order of this Court. 4. The Respondents filed their counter-affidavits. 5. In the counter-affidavit filed by the 5th Respondent, it is stated that they received orders of this Court on 31.07.2021 and immediately on the same day he stopped the execution of work and intimated the same to the Executive Engineer and assistant Engineer vide letter, dated 31.07.2021. The same was communicated to the Mandal Praja Parishad Development Officer also and accordingly, construction work has been stopped. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the Respondents. Perused the material available on record. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the averment made in the counter-affidavit of the 5th Respondent is correct and the execution of work was stopped from 31.07.2021. He sought permission of the Court that if execution of work is resumed during the pendency of the order of this Court, the petitioners may be permitted to approach this Court by way of filing fresh contempt case. 8. Having heard the submissions of the respective counsels and in view of the fact that admittedly the execution of work was stopped from 31.07.2021 onwards, in the considered opinion of this Court, no further adjudication is required in this contempt case. 9. accordingly, the contempt case is closed. However, it is open to the petitioners to approach this Court, if Respondents violates the order of this Court in future. 10. There shall be no order as to costs. 11. as a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.