THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA I.A.No.1 of 2026 in/and CONTEMPT CASE (SR) NO: 1411 OF 2026

ORDER:

I.A.No.1 of 2026 is filed seeking to grant leave to file contempt case.

2. The contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the orders dated 06.12.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.18416 of 2023.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner(s).

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that I.A.No.1 of

2026 is filed seeking leave to file contempt case with delay and the contempt case is filed alleging that orders of this Court dated 06.12.2023 are not complied with as directed by this Court.

5. On perusal of the petition filed by the petitioner that the orders of this Court were served upon the respondents on 18.03.2024. While disposing of the Writ Petition, this Court directed the respondent authorities to pay claim amount within a period of six (06) weeks time period from the date of receipt of copy of the order and to comply with the orders of this Court dated 18.03.2024. If that is so, the order dated 07.11.2023 should be implemented on or before 29.04.2024. As per Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 the contempt is started within a period of one year from the date on which the contempt alleged to have been started. As such, the contempt should be filed within a period of one year from the date when the contemptuous action said to have been started by the respondents. Therefore, the contempt case should be filed on or before 29.04.2025, but admittedly this contempt case is filed on 08.01.2026 without assigning any reasons for the delay caused at sworn affidavit filed in support of the contempt case. It is settled principle of law that any delay in invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section 20 of the Act, cannot be condoned, since the contempt should be applied in strict sense. Therefore, the general principle for condonation of delay i.e., the court must be liberal, pragmatic and reasonable in allowing delay petitions is not applicable in view of Section 20 of the Act.

6. For better understanding Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, is extracted hereunder:

“20. Limitation for actions for contempt.—No court shall initiate any proceedings of contempt, either on its own motion or otherwise, after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed.”

7. In view of the reasons stated above and on perusal of the Section 20 of the Act, 1971, I.A.No.1 of 2026 is not maintainable. Accordingly, I.A.No.1 of 2026 is dismissed. Consequently, the contempt case is closed. However, if the petitioner has any grievance, the petitioner is at liberty to proceed further by initiating appropriate proceedings. No order as to costs.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed.

________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J

23.01.2026 BSP HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA I.A.No.1 of 2026 in/and CONTEMPT CASE (SR) NO: 1411 of 2026

23.01.2026 BSP