The High Court · 2025

2. Sri Zendage Hanuman konda, District Colbctor, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, Telangana. g. 9i. (. Gangadhar, Additional Collector Local Bodies, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, Telangana. +. 9qt. R. Sunandha, District Panchayat Officer, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, Telangana.

5. Sri Sai Varanasi, Panchayat Secretary, Venkatapuram Gram Panchayat, Thurkapally Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, Telangana.

6. Sri. V. Brahmaiah, Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Thurkapally Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, Telangana.

7. AW Bharani, Wo Adapa Kumar, Aged 40 yrs, Occ. Housewife, R/o Plot No 69, H No 682/'l , Sri Sai Nagar ColonYMedipally Peerzadiguda Medchal Malkajgiri Dist 500-098. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. M V HANUMANTHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: SRI K. PRADEEP REDDY SC for Zilla Parishads The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE K. SARATH ORDER C.C.No.9OS of 2o25 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and without issuing any notice to the respondents, this contempt case is disposed of at the stage of admission.

2. This contempt case is filed by the petitioners to punish the respondents for willful disobedience of the order dated 22.02.2024 in W.P.No.1857 of 2024.

3. After hearing the learne d counsel for the petitioners, this Court has passecl oral order in dismissing the instant Contempt Case on 17.O4.2025 and while dictating the orders, this Court observed that the petitioners have not liled the entire documents lrled in C.C.No.1125 of 2024 in W.P.No.1857 of 2024. In view of the sarne, the matter q,as listed under the caption "For being mentioned" on 25.04.2025 and called for the entire record in C.C.No. 1125 of 2024 rn W.P.No.1857 of 2024. 2 SK, J C.C.No.9O5 of 202 5

4. The petitioners herein are arrayed. as the respondent Nos.7 and 8 in W.P.No.1857 of 2024. After hearing both sides, this Court disposed of W.P.No.1857 of 2024 on 22.02.2024. The relevant portion in para Nos.7 and 8 is as follows:- "7. After hearrng both sides and perusing the entire material on record, this Court is of thc considered view that the respondent No.7 and 8 without having valid pcrmissions commenced the construction activity in the subject property Thercaitcr the respondent No. 8 made application for construction permission and the respondent No.S did not pass any orders for the same. lil fact the respondent No.5 issued notice to the respondent No.8 to stop construction on the ground that there is no valid permission to construction of building an<l the construction of the respondent Nos.7 and 8 amounts to unauthorize(l construcLion.

8. In vicrv of the above findings, the writ petition is allowed dirccting thc officral respondents to stop further construction activity of the rcspondents Nos. 7 and 8 in S\.No.68/1. 69llll,69/l12 and 7Ol1to an extent of land Ac.2.lO guntas siru:rtcd at Venkatapuram Village of Thurkapally Mandal, Yadadrr[Jhu!an.rgrrr [)Lstnct, ti]l a valid construction permission obtained from concerned authoritrcs. II rcspondent Nos.7 and 8 are continue lvith their c.,nstructron :Lcrrvitv on the subjcct property, the same is liable to be dcmolishecl on rhe ground that construction is unauthoriz€d.,

5. After disposal of W.P.No.1857 of 2024 on

22.O2.2O24, the respondent No.7 herein filed C.C.No.l 125 of 2024 against the petitioners herein and also the oflicial respondents herein in view of the continuation of the construction by the petitioners SK, J C.C.No.905 of 2025 without arry valid permission in spite of the direction of this Court.

6. In the said contempt case, the official respondents have liled counter stating that the petitioners herein without obtaining permission have continued the constructions and the respondent authorities have issued notices to them. In the said contempt case, the petitioner herein and the also the respondent No.3- District Panchayat Officer and the respondent No.4- Panchayat Secretary filed counters. The petitioners herein being respondent Nos.6 and 7 in C.C.No. 1125 of 2024 filed counters stating that after passing of the orders of this Court, they have never raised any further construction except construction of some steps zrnd ramp to access to the subject property. The District Panchayat Oflicer in his counter in C.C.No. 1125 of 2024 has stated that the Panchayat Secreta{r has su.bmitted a report dated 04.O4 .2024 and issued notice to the petitioners herein to stop illegal constructions 4 SK, J C.C.No.9OS oi 202! and directed to obtain valid permission .from the concerned authorities as per the directions of the Court. The District Panchayat Off,rcer has again issued No.225 I 2024 / District Panchayat dated 22.07.2024 lor complying with the orders of this Court for stopping of construction. In spite of that the petitioners herein have not stopped the construction and thereafter, thc respondents have issued notice to the petitioners on 21.O3.2025 directing to remove the illegal constructions. In spite of tllat the petitioners have not givcn reply and thereafter, the respondent authoritics havc clcmolished the unamthorized constructions in the subject property, which were constructed by thc petitioncrs, by complying with the orders of this Court. The respondent authorities have submitted compliance report to the Court. In view of the same, the said contempt case was closed on

04.o4.2025. k I 5 SK, J C.C.No.905 of 2O2{

7. Now the petitioners have filed the. present contempt taking advanfage of the words mentioned in para No.8 of the order dated 22.02.2024 in W.P.No. 1857 of 2024. The petitioners contended that this Court has not directed to demolish any construction and in view of the same, the respondent authorities have violated the orders of this Court and they are liable to be punished. In fact, the petitioners herein have failed to produce any document along with the contempt case to show the valid permission for construction of the building in the suit schedule property. Moreover, the petitioners have not given all the particulars of the documents filed along with the Contempt Case No. LI25 of 2O24 in W.P.No.1857 ol

8. The respondent authorities have complied with [he orders ol this Court in W.P.No. 1857 of 2024 dated 22.O2.2024 by demolishing the illegal constructions as the petitioners have continued 6 SK, J C.C. No-905 of 2025 building constructions in spite of the direction of this Court. Moreover, the respondent authorities have issued notice to the pctitioners for stopping of constructions and also the demolition of illegal constructions. In view of the sarne, there is no violation of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.1857 of 2024 and there is no cause of action for filing ol the contempt case against the respondents by the petit-ioners herein

9. In vieu,of the above findings, this Contempt Case is dismissed as uo causc ol action for hling the same. No order as to costs iO. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this conte,mrlt casr:. shall stand r-loscd //TRUE COPY// SD/- N. SRIHARI DEPUTY REGISTRAR fufr.,"=* SEC To,

1. One CC to SRI M V HANUMANTHA RAO Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRI K. PRADEEP REDDY standing counsel forZP [OUT] 3. Two CD CoPies o. MY/gh HIGH COURT DATED:,1710412025 ORDER CC.No.905 ot 2025 CONTEMP IS CLOSED q J o o ,.'3, o(( tHE ST4 ).a ( 05 tlJE t[t * o4..Sr',Tar i ( A