SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 15679

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
B S BHANUMATHI
Gareeb Guide (Voluntary Organization) – Appellant
Versus
Shri Manazir Jeelani Samoon I.A.S – Respondent
CC 1270/2024



##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:9066

APHC010089302024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3311]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

Friday, the twenty seventh day of February two thousand and twenty six

Present

The Honourable Ms. Justice B. S. Bhanumathi

Contempt Case No.1270 of 2024

Between:

Gareeb Guide (voluntary organization) and others ...Petitioners

and

Shri Manazir Jeelani Samoon, I. A. S. and others ...Contemnors

Counsel for the petitioners:

1. Dr. D. V. Rao

Counsel for the contemnors:

1. V. Maheswar Reddy

2. Nil

The Court made the following:

##PAGE2##

2

BS2B0, 2J6 :APHC:9066

C.C.No.1270 of 2024

ORDER:

This contempt case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondents Nos.1 and 2

for misleading this Court willfully and deliberately disobeying the order

of this Court, dated 08.02.2024, in W.P.No.1703 of 2024.

2. The case of the petitioners is briefly as follows:

a. About sixty years ago, Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple

was constructed in the land in Sy.No.76(3) in Chinnadugam Village,

Jalumuru Mandal, Srikakulam District. The petitioner No.1 has been

successfully conducting annual celebrations of Sri Lakshmi Narasimha

Swamy Temple in the same village since 2017, as none expressed

interest for the maintenance of Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple,

including the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department,

Srikakulam District / respondent No.5 in the writ petition. The petitioner

No.2 in W.P.No.1703 of 2024 is a committee registered vide No.18 of

2021, dated 20.01.2021. With the help of the petitioner No.1, the

petitioner No.2 successfully conducted the 59th annual celebrations of

Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple in the year 2021. Even though

the respondent No.6 in W.P.No.2797 of 2022 / sole accused in

F.I.R.No.116 of 2021, as per the proceedings Rc.No.Nil, dated

02.02.2022, of the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department,

Srikakulam District, did not file any rival claim to conduct the 60th annual

celebrations of Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple in the year

2022, the respondent No.1 herein rejected the application of the

petitioner vide endorsement RC.No.200/2022/E3/dated 01.02.2022

basing on a false report of Tahsildar, vide Rc.No.2022/A, dated

10.02.2022, and another false report of the Sub-Divisional Police Officer

##PAGE3##

3

BS2B0, 2J6 :APHC:9066

C.C.No.1270 of 2024

dated 09.02.2022. After 2021, no F.I.R. has been registered under

Section 107 of Cr.P.C. against the villagers of Chinnadugam which is

within the jurisdiction of Jalumuru Police Station. On 29.11.2023, vide

acknowledgment dated 01.12.2023, the petitioner No.1 submitted a

representation to the District Collector, Srikakulam for granting

permission and providing police aid to conduct the 62nd annual

celebrations of Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple. But, there is no

action till the date of filing of the W.P.No.1703 of 2024. Therefore, the

said writ petition was filed. On 08.02.2024, this Court passed the

following order:

“…directing the petitioners to submit a fresh representation

providing all the proposed activities for which permission is

sought, and thereafter, the concerned authorities shall

dispose of the representation forthwith and if any particulars

required are lacking in the representation, the concerned

authorities may ask the petitioners to furnish the further details

instead of keeping the representation pending for

consideration, as the schedule date for the ceremonies is fast

approaching…”

b. Accordingly, the petitioner No.1 submitted a representation dated

08.02.2024 through e-mail and another representation dated

09.02.2024 with the details of cultural activities and collected

acknowledgment of receipt of representation. As there was no action by

the respondents Nos. 1 and 2, on 13.02.2024, the petitioner No.1 issued

a notice before contempt to the respondents Nos.1 and 2 under

acknowledgment. Even then, there was no action by the respondents.

On 13.02.2024, the respondent No.1 issued proceedings vide SR

No.93/2024/JA(LC) / dated 13.02.2024, to the resp

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top