##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:13618

APHC010336932025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3504]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1672/2025

Between:

1. M R G JANARDHANA RAO, (BC.CODE.5S860000), S/O LATE.

RAMAPPADU, OCC. SBI-BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT, AGED 47

YEARS, R/O. VILL .TULAGAM, HIRAMANDALAM-MANDALAM,

SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P, PIN 532459. AND 70 ORS

...PETITIONER

AND

1. M R DEVILAL MEHRA, Deputy General Manager (FI) State Bank of

India Amaravati Local Head Office Gunfoundry, Hyderabad - 500001,

Telangana.

...CONTEMNOR

Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying

that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may

be pleased to pleased to summon the respondent/contemnor for willfully

violating order dated. 06.10.2017 in W.P.No.33461 of 2017 and punish him as

per law in the interest of Justice and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. ANGURU NARAYANA RAO

Counsel for the Contemnor:

1.

2

2026:APHC:13618

The court made the following ORDER

The contempt case has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the

interim orders dated 06.10.2017, passed in W.P.No.33461 of 2017.

2. Apparently, the contempt case was instituted on 04.07.2025 and on

27.07.2025, the matter was adjourned at the request made by the learned

counsel for the petitioner. Again, when the case was listed on 30.01.2026,

05.02.2026 and 13.02.2026, there was no representation for the petitioner.

However, when the matter was called on 20.02.2026, some other counsel

represented the learned counsel for the petitioner and sought time for one

week.

3. For the sake of comprehensive, the docket orders passed by this Court

are extracted hereunder:-

On 25.07.2025, the following order was passed:

“At the request made by learned counsel for the

petitioner, post after three weeks.”

On 30.01.2026, the following order was passed:

“No representation for the petitioner.

Post next week.”

On 05.02.2026, the following order was passed:

“On 30.01.2026, there was no representation for the

petitioner.

Today also, there was no representation for the

petitioner.

List next week under the caption ‘for dismissal’.”

3

2026:APHC:13618

On 13.02.2026, the following order was passed:

“On 30.01.2026 as well as on 05.02.2026, this Court

passed the following orders:

“30.01.2026: No representation for the

petitioner.

Post next week.

05.02.2026: On 30.01.2026, there was

no representation for the petitioner. Today

also, there was no representation for the

petitioner. List next week under the caption

‘for dismissal’.”

Unfortunately, today also, there is no representation

for the petitioner. However, in order to offer one more

opportunity to the petitioner, list the matter next week

under the very same caption i.e., dismissal.”

On 20.02.2026, the following order was passed:

“At the request made on behalf of the learned

counsel for the petitioner, list the matter next week under

the same caption i.e. ‘dismissal’.”

4. Today, even though the matter is listed under the caption for dismissal

and called in the morning session, as well as in the afternoon session, none

appeared for the petitioner.

5. From the above, it is crystal clear that in spite of the multiple

opportunities granted to the petitioner, unfortunately, none turned up before

the Court. The instant case is a classic example of petitions being filed

without any genuine intent to pursue them. Neither the petitioner nor the

advocate has shown any interest in prosecuting the matter, thereby impeding

the course of administrative justice and contributing to the unnecessary

accumulation of pending files.

4

2026:APHC:13618

6. The Registry also brought to the notice of this Court that on 23.01.2026

itself, the main writ petition No.33461 of 2017 was dismissed as withdrawn by

giving liberty to the writ petitioners to work out their remedies in accordance

with Law.

7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this