D.Rajeswar Reddy v. Sri.Heera Naik,
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY,THE TWENry NINTH DAY OFDECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE K. SARATH CONTEMPT CASE NO: 937 OF 2013 ln W.P.No.6808 of 2O13 Contempt Case filed Under Sections 1O to 12 of Conternpt of Courts Act to punish the respondents herein for wilful and deliberate disobedience of the Orders of the High Court dated 07-03-2013 in WPMP No.8519/2023 W.P. No. 6808 of 2013 Between:
D.Rajeswar Reddy, S/o Late Laxma Reddy, Aged about 5B years, Occ. Retired Government Servant, R/o H.No.1-36, Bacharam, Hyathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
...PETITIONER AND
1. Sri.Heera Naik, Bacharam Gram Panchayat, Rep.by its The Mandal Executive Officer and Special Officer Bacharam Village, Hyathnagar Mandal. Ranga Reddy District
2. Sri.Anantha Raj Reddy, The Panchayat Secretary Grampanchayat Bacharam Hayatnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
3. Sri.Aruna, The Mandal Parishad Development Officer Hyathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
4. Sri.B.Ramesh Goud, S/o Ydagiri, Aged about 32 years, Occ: Ex. Sarpanch Fi/o H.No.2-75, Bacharam (V) Hyathnagar Mandal Ranga Reddy District ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. G. JYOTHI KIRAN Counsel for the Respondent Nos 2 TO 3: SRI KISHORE RAO PUSKURU (SC FOR TS ZILLA PARISHADS) The Court made the following ORDER:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH CONTEMPT CASE No. 937 of 2OL3 tn W.P.No.68O8 of 2O13 ORDER:
This Court passed interim orders on 07.03.2013 directing the respondent No. 1-Gram Panchayat to I dispose of the representation filed by the petitioner within a period of hfteen (15) days from the date of receipt of copy of that order. As the respondent No.1 has not complied with the orders passed by this Court, the present contempt case has been frled. Even after completion of ten (10) years, no counter is hled by the respondents and the learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to get instructions whether the cause in the contempt case survives or not.
2. Recording the a_forementioned submission, this contempt case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
SD/- CH.VENKATESWARLU OEPUTY REGISTRAR \ //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER To
1. OneCCto SRl. G. JYOTHI KIRAN, Advocate [OPUC]
2. One CC to SRl. KISHORE RAO PUSKURU SC FOR TS ZILLA PARISHADS IoPUCI
3. Two CD Copies NS s
I I HIGH COURT DATED:291'1212O23 ( tl S ( Jq t'lAB 2ii?i a'- €sPATC t o EO
ORDER
CC.No.937 ot 2013 ln WP.No.6808 of 2013 CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE W