M. A. Vazeer v. Mr. Rajeevgandhi Hanumanthu

':

.j.

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

't AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2332OF 2018 ii'

,i Contempt Case under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act t*i 1971 to summon and punish the respondent for his willful and deliberate disobedience in implementing the interim order dt.31-10-2017 passed by this Honble Court in WPMP No.35763 of ..# * ffi 2017 in WP No.28753 of 2A17 .

Between:

M. A. Vazeer, S/o. Subhan, Age. 56 years, Occ. KTPS Employee, Rl/o. Qtr. No.B.F.416, l.M. Colony, Paloncha Town,Bhadradri ;iiti 'ffi Kothagudem District, Telangana.

...PETITIONER AND Mr. Rajeevgandhi Hanumanthu, District Collector, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, Kothagudem, Telangana.

...RESPONDENT/R6 Counse! for the Petitioner: SRl. PEETA RAMAN Counsel for the Respondent: ASSISTANT GP FOR REVENUE *ifr') +"**F i "ri*f The Court made the following: ORDER

HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE J. SREENfVAS RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.2332 of 2O18 OR.DER:

This Contempt Case is filed by invoking the pro'risions under Section 1O to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act for non-implementation of the interim order passed by this Court on 31.1O.2017 in W.P.M.P.No.35763 of 2OtZ in W.P.No.28753 of 2OL7.

2.

Heard Sri Peeta Raman, learned counsel for the petitioner ald learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent.

3.

l,earned counsel for the petitioner submits that inspite of the specific direction issued by this Court on 3l.LO.2Ol7, respondent has not taken any steps to I \I consider the representation of the petitioner dated 08.05.2017 and the same is clear violation of orders of this Court dated 3L.7O.2OI7.

4.

Per contra, learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue, on instructions, would submit that respondent considered the representation submitted by the petitioner

rc dated O8.O5.2O17 and, after following due procedure as contemplated under law issued speaking order vide proceedings Rc.No.E3l 195812018, dated 29-08.2018 and communicated the said order to the petitioner and a copy of the said order is placed on record.

5.

In view of the compliance of the order passed by this Court on 3l.IO.2Ol7, no further adjudication is required' 6.

Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to avail the remedies as available under law, including questioning the proceedings dated 29.08.2018 issued by the respondent.

Pend.ing miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

${ffiJ."w I //TRUE COPY// SD/. K. SHYLESH!

DEPUW Rff;lsrRAR SECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to SRl. PEETA RAMAN Advocate [OPUC]

2. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE (TG) ,High Court forthe State of Telangana. [OUT] 3.Two CD CoPies TUJAKt\"

.t(

\( a::, HIGH COURT DATED:25101t2024 i.r$;,...

,ffi -a.\ . ,,\;'i Ii, , .,.) l +,1 -:' ,l;

-.,. ,.il/ t'

\ ir:, l..L . - -+-^r-.: -, ''

ORDER

{ i*.t$i a, ., CC.No.2332 of 2O1B ffi # ,CLOSED THE CONTEMPT CASE z ffi ffi