Janai R. Kondapi, Secretary, Government of A.P., R&B Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad v. Venat Rao
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 ss. 10, 12
Judgment
Smt. Janai R. Kondapi, Secretary, Government of A.P., R&B Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad
Sri Indrasena Reddy, Superintending Engineer (PR), Road and Buildings, Karimnagar 3. The Executive Engineer, R&B, Karimnagar 4. Sri Devabratha Kantha, District Collector, Karimnagar 5. T. Someshwara Rao, Contractor, R/o. H.No. 1-1-845, Siddarthanagar, Kazipet, Warangal District 6. Erroju Mallaiah, S/o. Chandraiah, Person-in-charge, R/o. Nawabpet Village and Post, Chigurumamidi Mandal, Karimnagar District
Thakur Narsing Bhanu, S/o. Devi Singh, R/o. Nawabpet Village and Post, Chigurumamidi Mandal, Karimnagar District
Donapati Jogi Reddy, S/o. Linga Reddy, R/o. Nawabpet Village and Post, Chigurumamidi Mandal, Karimnagar District
Sri Muralidhara Rao, Supervisor under Respondent No.5, R/o. C/o. T. Someshwara Rao, H.No. 1-1- 845, Siddarthanagar, Kazipet, Warangal
The Superintendent of Police, Karimnagar (Respondent No.10 is impleaded as 10th Respondent as per court order dated 24-9-2002 in C.C. No. 436 of 2001)
V. Venat Rao, S/o. V. Venkat Rao, H.no. 2-6-1394, Srinivasa Colony, Eilter Bed Road, Hanmaonda, Warangal (Respondent No.11 impleaded as party respondent vide orders of court dated 14-11-2002 in Application No.1293/2002) (Respondent No.3 is only proforma party, Hence, no notice is necessary) Respondents This contempt case coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and affidavit filed in support thereof and the order of the High Court dated 5-11-2003 and made herein and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. C. Ramesh Sagar, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the G.P. for Roads & Buildings on behalf of the Respondents 1 to 4 and of Mr. C.V. Mohan Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No.5 and of Mr. P. Giri Krishna, Advocate for the Respondents 6 to 8 and of the G.P. for Home on behalf of Respondent No.10 and of Mr. V. Ravinder Rao, Advocate for the Respondent No.11, the Court made the following 2 ORDER: “ Counter affidavit of 1st respondent is filed. Post on 28-11-2003. Respondent No.2 and 5 to 8 shall present before this court on 28-11- 2003.” JOINT REGISTRAR // true copy// SECTION OFFICER To
1. Smt. Janai R. Kondapi, Secretary, Government of A.P., R&B Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad
2. Sri Indrasena Reddy, Superintending Engineer (PR), Road and Buildings, Karimnagar (BY SPEED POST)
The Executive Engineer, R&B, Karimnagar.
Sri Devabratha Kantha, District Collector, Karimnagar.
T. Someshwara Rao, Contractor, R/o. H.No. 1-1-845, Siddarthanagar, Kazipet, Warangal District (BY SPEED POST)
Erroju Mallaiah, S/o. Chandraiah, Person-in-charge, R/o. Nawabpet Village and Post, Chigurumamidi Mandal, Karimnagar District (BY SPEED POST)
7. Thakur Narsing Bhanu, S/o. Devi Singh, R/o. Nawabpet Village and Post, Chigurumamidi Mandal, Karimnagar District (BY SPEED POST)
8. Donapati Jogi Reddy, S/o. Linga Reddy, R/o. Nawabpet Village and Post, Chigurumamidi Mandal, Karimnagar District (BY SPEED POST) (ADDRESSEES 2 AND 5 TO 8 - WITH A DIRECTION TO APPEAR BEFORE THIS COURT ON 28-11-2003 AT 10.30 A.M.)
9. Sri Muralidhara Rao, Supervisor under Respondent No.5, R/o. C/o. T. Someshwara Rao, H.No. 1-1- 845, Siddarthanagar, Kazipet, Warangal
10. The Superintendent of Police, Karimnagar 11. V. Venat Rao, S/o. V. Venkat Rao, H.no. 2-6-1394, Srinivasa Colony, Eilter Bed Road, Hanmaonda, Warangal.
Two CCs to the G.P. for R & B, High Court of AP, Hyderabad 13. Two CCs to the G.P. for Home, High Court of AP, Hyderabad
One Spare Copy MSR HIGH COURT DATE: 24-11-2003 ORDER C.C. No. 436 of 2001 DIRECTION DRAFTED BY : MSR DRAFTED ON : 24.11.2003 HIGH COURT LNRJ DT. 24.11.2003 NOTE: POST ON 28-11-2003 ORDER C.C. No. 436 of 2001 DIRECTION
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 16 Jun 2003. The bench was L NARASIMHA REDDY.
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.