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 punish the respondents for willfully and wantonly not implementing the orders of the Honble High Court passed in W.P.No. 28385 of 2025 dt.16-10-2025 under Sec. 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with filing of the Certified Copies of Orders of this Hon'ble Court dated 16-10-2025 passed in W.P.No.28385 of 2025 and pass

The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

CONTEMPT CASE No.401 of 2026

ORDER:

1. This Court, vide order dated 16.10.2025, disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents to follow due process of law, if the land is required for any public purpose. The said direction was issued basing upon the written instructions of the Tahsildar, Bapatla Mandal, which indicates that there is no proposal for a laying two-lane paved shoulder road from Epurupalem Village of Chirala Mandal to Pandurangapuram Village of Bapatla Mandal and no lands were identified to lay the said road and if there is any such proposal in future by the Tourism and Culture Department for formation of the said road, the lands required will be acquired by the Government after following due process of law.

2. Inspite of addressing written instructions stating that there is no proposal for laying road, the respondents have laid a road in the subject land of the writ petition without following due process of law. Hence, the present contempt case is filed.

3. The respective respondents have filed counter-affidavit. An additional affidavit was also filed by the 1st respondent tendering unconditional apology. In addition to that, it is stated that contracted was directed to stop the construction of road at Reach Nos.1 to 11 immediately and the contractor has stopped laying of road at a distance of 242 meters away from the subject land. Hence, prayed to close the contempt case against the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner draw the attention of this Court to the letter addressed by the Deputy Executive Engineer, to the Srividya Constructions i.e., the contractor and stated that the contractor was only instructed to stop the work until final judgment. This indicates that after disposal of the contempt case, the respondents may proceed to lay a road. Hence, prayed to pass suitable orders.

5. The additional affidavit clearly indicates that respondents have violated the orders of this Court. However, taking a lenient view, the Contempt case is closed and the respondents are directed not to lay a road without following due process of law. It is made clear that if any further violation, it will be viewed seriously.

There shall be no order as to costs.

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