Manohar Dixit v. Dr. V.P. Jauhari, I.A.S., Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 ss. 10, 12
Judgment
are hereby required to appear in person before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad on 26-12-2005 at 10.30.a.m and show cause why you shall not be punished or other appropriate order be not passed against you for Contempt of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. You shall attend High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in person on 26-12-2005 at 10.30.am and shall continue to attend the High Court on all days thereafter to which date the case against you stands as adjourned and until final orders are passed on the charge against you. Herein fail not. DEPUTY REGISTRAR ..2.. To
The Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. (in duplicate along with copy of petition and affidavit for service on the Respondent No. 1 & 2 and return to this court on or before 26- 12-2005)
The District Judge, Medak District at Sangareddy ( i n duplicate along with copy of petition and affidavit for service on the Respondent No. 3 and return to this court on or before 26-12- 2005)
Dr. V.P. Jauhari, I.A.S., Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad.
T.K . Dewan, I.A.S., Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. (ADDRESSEES 2 & 3 BY SPECIAL MESSENGER with a copy of petition and affidavit)
B. Venkatesham, I.A.S., District Collector (C.S), Medak District at Sangareddy. (BY RPAD with a copy of petition and affidavit)
One spare copy. Ksv HIGH COURT JCJ & RRJ DATE: 28-11-2005 NOTE: POST ON 26-12-2005 ORDER C.C. NO. 1214 OF 2005 NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS FOR THEIR APPEARANCE BEFORE THIS COURT
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — ss. 10, 12.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 28 Nov 2005. The bench was CHELAMESWAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.