Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 19454
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
MUTYALA SRIHARINARAYANA – Appellant
Versus
SRI G SAI PRASAD IAS – Respondent
CC 443/2025
A delay in complying with a court order due to General Elections and subsequent General Transfers of officials does not constitute willful disobedience under the Contempt of Courts Act if the delay is reasonably explained and the contemnor tenders an unconditional apology satisfactory to the Court.
Headnote:(A) Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Sections 10 to 12 - Willful disobedience of court orders - Order directing authorities to pass reasoned orders on claim for R&R package within three months - Delay in compliance - Apology - Under Section 12 of the Act, contemnor may be discharged or punishment remitted on apology being made to the satisfaction of the Court. (Para 15)
(B) Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Section 12 - Delay in compliance due to General Elections and General Transfers - Reasonable explanation - Time taken for officials to settle in their respective posts after taking charge does not amount to willful disobedience. (Para 16)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners filed a contempt case alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 08.01.2024 in W.P.No.436 of 2024. This Court had directed the authorities to pass orders on the petitioners' claim for Rehabilitation & Resettlement (R&R) package concerning lands acquired for the Polavaram Project. A similar order in W.P.No.26293 of 2023 had directed that reasoned orders be passed within three months, and the present case was disposed of in similar terms. The petitioners alleged that the authorities failed to pass orders within the stipulated time and only did so in April 2025, after the contempt case was filed.
Findings of Court:
The Court found that the respondent authorities did pass orders pursuant to the Court's direction, though with a delay. The delay was satisfactorily explained in the counter affidavit by citing General Elections and subsequent General Transfers, which caused a change in personnel. The Court held that such a delay, caused by circumstances beyond the control of the authorities, does not amount to willful or deliberate disobedience. The Court accepted the unconditional apology tendered by the respondents.
Issues: The main issue was whether the delay in passing orders by the respondent-authorities amounted to a willful and deliberate disobedience of the Court's order dated 08.01.2024.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the delay caused by General Elections and General Transfers, which necessitates time for officials to settle into their new posts, constitutes a reasonable explanation. Since the delay was not willful or wanton, and the orders were eventually passed (though questioned in a separate writ petition), the respondents were exonerated from the contempt case.
Result: Contempt Case is dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. (Para 18)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the contempt case and the original writ petition order to pass reasoned orders. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. parties' arguments on willful disobedience and reasons for delay. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
ORDER
This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for the willful disobedience of the orders dated 08.01.2024 passed in W.P.No.436 of 2024.
2. This Court, on 08.01.2024, disposed of W.P.No.436 of 2024 as per the orders passed in W.P.No.26293 of 2023 dated 09.10.2023 directing the respondent authorities to pass orders on the petitioner’s claim. Alleging non-compliance of the said direction, the present contempt case has been filed.
3. Heard Sri K.B.Ramanna Dora, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt Sushma Yaganti, learned counsel for the respondents.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit submitted that the petitioners filed writ petition vide W.P.No.436 of 2024 being aggrieved by the action of the respondents in rejecting their claim for R&R package for acquiring their lands for Polavaram Project. In a similar circumstance, some individuals filed a writ petition vide W.P.No.26293 of 2023 and this Court, on 09.10.2023 disposed of the same directing the respondents concerned to pass a reasoned order afresh after hearing the parties by fixing three months time. As the said order is squarely applicable to the facts of the case in W.P.No.436 of 2024, this Court, on 08.01.2024, disposed of the said writ petition in similar lines as in W.P.No.26293 of 2023. Though the order was dispatched on 02.02.2024, since, the authorities have not passed orders within the stipulated period of three months, the present Contempt Case has been filed. He would further contend that after filing of contempt case and that too after receiving personal notice, the authorities passed orders in the month of April, 2025. The petitioners questioned the said orders by way of a writ petition in W.P.No.16329 of 2025. Not passing orders in the stipulated period amounts to willful and deliberate disobedience of the orders passed by this Court, as such, they are liable for punishment, accordingly, prayed to punish the respondent/contemnors by virtue of provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents on counter submitted that as general elections were held in the month of May, 2024 and further pursuant to the elections, general transfers also took place and after verifying the claims of the petitioners orders have been passed as such, there occurred delay, the same is neither willful nor wanton and tendered unconditional apology. The said delay is beyond the control of the authorities concerned. She further submitted that mere passing of orders after filing the contempt case does not amount to willful disobedience as alleged by the petitioners nor it is deliberate violation, as such, prayed to exonerate the respondents from the contempt case.
9. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
10. This Court by way of order dated in W.P.No.436/2024 passed the following order:
“Heard Sri K.B.Ramanna Dora, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Vamsi Krishna, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition.
2. When the matter is taken up for consideration today, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.26293/2023 dated 09.10.2023 and accordingly prayed to pass similar order in this writ petition also.
3. To the said submission, learned Assistant Government Pleader reported no objection.
4. Taking the submissions of both the learned counsel into consideration and following the above said order and for the reasons recorded therein, this writ petition also stands disposed in terms of the order passed in W.P.No.26293/2023 dated 09.10.2023.
Acco
