M/S. Sky-Tech Consultancy, v. Mr. M. Krishna Reddy,

[ 32e6 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1028 OF 2014 Contempt Case under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondent herein for, willfully violating, the order of the High Court dated 23.01.2014 in W.P.No .29077 of 2013.

Between:

M/s. Sky-Tech Cohsultancy, Rep. by its Managing Partner M. Thirupathi Reddy, S/o M. Ramchandra Reddy, Aged:48 years, Occ: Private Civil Enginee(consultancy), Fl/o. H.No. 18-971F-7, 15t floor, Rajinigandha Apartments, Chaitanyapuri, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad-60 ...PETITIONER AND Mr. M. Krishna Reddy, S/o Not known to the Petitioner Commissioner of Sangareddy Municipality, Sangareddy, Medak District. ...RESPONDENTS Gounsel for the Petitioners: M/s. PONNAM ASHOK GOUD Counset for the Respondents: SC FOR MC, TELANGANA The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY ORDER:

The contempt case is filed for alleged violation of orders of this court in w.P.N o.29077 0f 2013 dated 23.01.2014. Vide above said order, this Court was pleased to grant fifteen days time to the petitioner to draw up a detailed representation and submit the same to the respective local body, bringing out clearly as to how much money is due and payable on each count' It was also directed that the petitioner shall also set out as to how much money has been received by them so far and the same must be given credit to rvhile making dernand for payment of the balance outstanding amount. The concerned local bodies were directed to decide the said representation within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of representation addressing the issue and to commfunicate its order in response thereto.

Further, it was observed in the said order that if the local body realises that any money is genuinely payable to the petitioner and the same is kept t I pending, the same may also be released within a period of 30 days. Atleging non-implementation of the said order by the respondent herein, the present contempt case is filed in the yeat 2014.

This Court on 11.07.2014 issued notice to the respondents, but cognizance has not been taken under Section 17 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971. It is brought to the notice of this Court that since the contempt case is pending all these years, respondent has not considered the representation submitted by the petitioner stating that after the disposal of the contempt case, the grievance of the petitioner will be addressed by the respondent. Therefore, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and maintainability of the same, considers it appropriate to close the contempt case, as no further orders are necessary, directing the respondent to comply with the order dated 23.01.2014 in W.P.No.29077 of 2013. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner, if any cause survives in the contempt cpse, to make appropriate application for revival of contempt case. The contempt case is accordingly closed.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

SD'. K. SAILESHI REGISTRAR E/t'

DEPUTY /TRUE COPY/ SECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC toM/s. PONNAM ASHOK GOUD' Advocate [OPUC] 2.ONCCCTOSCFORSANGAREDDYMUNICIPALITY'SANgATEddY'MEdAK loPUCl p. Two CD CoPies BN q

a,- ./ HIGH COURT DATED:31/0112023 11f,. $i,6,16 { tr

ORDER

C) 2 1 lE[$ 2[13 CC.N o.1028 of 2014 -Jr CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE a