ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATI
Battu Devanand, J.
B Ashok Naidu & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
M. Hari Narayanan & Ors. – Respondents
Contempt Case No. 1660 of 2021
Decided On : 04-03-2022
Contempt - Implementation of Court Orders - The court found that the respondents had stopped the execution of work in compliance with the court's order, and therefore, no further adjudication was required in the contempt case.
Fact of the Case:
The respondents were accused of willful disobedience in implementing the court's orders to stop the construction of certain buildings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the execution of work was stopped by the respondents from the specified date, and no further adjudication was required.
Issues: The main issue was whether the respondents had willfully disobeyed the court's orders by proceeding with the construction.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the fact that the execution of work was stopped by the respondents in compliance with the court's order.
Final Decision: The contempt case was closed, but the petitioners were permitted to approach the court if the respondents violated the court's order in the future.
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.
Compliance with court orders is crucial, and the court will take into account the actions of the parties in determining contempt cases.
A person cannot be found guilty of contempt of court if they have followed due process of law and acted in compliance with a court order.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.