S. Kiran Kumar v. Sri. Lokesh Kumar D.S. I.A.S.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2255 OF 2022 Contempt case under Section 10 lo 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 to Punish the Respondents herein for violating, disobeying the Orders of the High Court dated 20-10-2022 passed in W.P.No.39030 ot 2022. Between:
S. Kiran Kumar, S/o S. Bala Narasimha, Aged about 47 years, Occ. Employee R/o H.No.41-147l1,Chand Bagh, Moula Ali, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad. ,..PETITIONER AND
1. Sri. Lokesh Kumar D.S. l.A.S., The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.
2. Smt.S. Pankaja, The Zonal Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, East Zone, Medchal-Malkajgiri District
3. Sri.N. Shankar, The Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Circle-1, Kapra, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. MUDDU VIJAY 9R\ Counsel for the Respondents: M DURGA PRASAD (SC FOR GHMC) The Court made the following: ORDER i
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI Contempt Case No.2255 of 2022
ORDER
This contempt case is filed seeking to punish respondent Nos.1 to 3 under Sections 10 lo 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act for willful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 20-10-2022 in W.P.No.39030 of 2022.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.Muddu Vijai submits that while disposing of the writ petition on 20-10-2022, this Court has observed that'it is submitted by the leamed Standing Counsel for the respondent Municipality that they have already given a notice on 19-09-2022 to the unofficial respondents and they will take further action'. He submits that in spite of that no action has been initiated and hence, the petitioner has filed the present contempt case. Leaned counsel submits that now in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it is stated that they have issued a notice dated 16-1 1 -2022 lo lhe unofficial respondents in the writ petition.
He submits that when already the respondents have issued a notice on 19-09-2022, why they have given another notice on 16-11-2022 it is not known- He further submits that when a speaking order was passed, questioning the same, the unofficial respondents in the writ petition have filed W.P.Nos.343, 366 and 421 ot 2023.
LK, J C.C No.2255 of 2022 '
submitted before this Court. He submits that the unofficial respondents in the writ petition have questioned ihe int,erim orders that were granted by the learned single Judge in the said writ petitions and the said wdt appeals were dismissed. He submits that there is non-compliance of the orders passed by this Court.
3.
Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation Mr. M. Durga Prasad submits that though there is a delay in implementing the orders, it is neither willful nor wanton but for the administrative reasons. He submits that the respondents have already filed vacate petitions in the writ petitions that are filed by the unofficial respondents and there is no intention on behalf of the respondents to violate the orders passed by this Court.
4.
ln compliance of the order passed by this Court, the respondents have already passed a speaking order and now it is the subject mafter of other writ petitions. Taking into consideration the submission of the leamed Standing Counsel, this Contempt Case is closed as the respondents have complied with the orders of this Court. No order as to costs.
5.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this contempt case, shall stand closed.
Sd/. I. NAGA LAKSHMI DEPUTY REGIStrRAR i \/ //TRUE COPY// \ u_, SECTION OFFICER To, One CC to SRt. MUDDU VtJAy Advocate [OpUC] One CC to SRl. M DURGA PRASAD (SC FOR GHMC) topUCI q ,r*3. Two CD Copies
HIGH COURT DATED: 0710212023 1 riE S T,1 ?ac \ o 0 2 l{frR 2l]23 ;:
;-.
ORDER
CC.No.2255 of 2022 CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE.
@tfl'
%e--- A.,t;