The High Court · 2025

1 1 . Kolanu Srinivas Reddy, S/o.Late Anji Reddy, Aged about 45 yrs, Occ Agriculture R/o Allapuram Village. Naryanapur'tvlanial yadadri- Bhuvanagiri District

12.9uduru /eghana, D/o. Late Venkat Reddy, Aged about 1.l Yrs, Occ Student, R/o Allapuram Vrrrage, Naryanapur lvlandaI yadadri- Bhuvanaqiri District. Reo. by her natural rnother and Guardian Guduru Vijaya, Wo late'./enkat Reddy, ' 13. Boddu Narsaiah, S/o.Galaiah, Aged about 86 yrs, Occ Senior Citizen, R/o Allapuram Village, Naryanapur lrrlahdal, yadadri- Bhuvanagiri llistrict.

14. Boddu Galaial'r, S/o.Jangaiah-, Aged about 42 yrs, Occ Agriculture, R/o - Allapuram Villa ge, Naryanapur Mandal, yadadri- Bhuvanagiri Diitrict. '15 Boddu Jangaiah, S/o.Galaiah, Aged about B0 yrs, Occ Serior Citizen, R/o Allapuram Village, Naryanapur Mandal, Yadadri- Bhuvanagiri District.

16.Tekula SrinqR.eddy S/o.Late. Ramchandra Reddy, Aged aL,out 53 yrs, Occ Agriculture, R/o Allapuram Village, Naryanapur Mahda[ yadardri- Bhuvanagiri District.

17. Boddu Pentaiah @ PentaiahVikram, S/o.Narsimha, Aged about 46 yrs, Occ Agriculture, R/o Allapuram Village,Naryanapur Manda[ yadadri- Bhuvanagiri District. lB.Boddu Posamnra. W/o.Narsimha, Aged about 70 yrs, Or;c Senior Citizen, R/o Allapuram Village, Naryanapur Mandal, yadadri- Bhuvanagiri t)istrict .

19.9uduru Ram reddy, S/o.Malla Reddy, Aged about 42 yrs, ,Jcc Agriculture, R/o Allapuram r,/illage, Naryanapur MandaI yadadri- Bhuvanalyiri Disirict. 20. Tekula Dilipreddy S/o. Late. Shiva Reddy, Aged about 47 yrs, Occ Agriculture, R/o Altapuram Virlage, Naryanaplr Maindal, yadadri- enuvinagiri District.

21. Tekula Seetharamreddy, S/o.Late. Shiva Reddy, Ageo about 45 yrs, Occ Agriculture, R/o Allapuram Village, Naryanapur Mandil, yadadri_ Bhuva'nagiri District.

22. Boddu Galaiah S/o.Narsimha. Aged about 40 yrs, Occ r\griculture, R/o Allapuram Village Na ryanapur Mandal, yadadri- Bhuvanagiri t)istrict,

23. Boddu Jangaiah, S/o.Jangaiah,, Aged about 36 yrs, ()cc r\griculture, R/o Allapuram Village. Naryanapur Mandal, yadad.ri- Bhuvanagiri t)iitrict.

24. Boddu Yadaiah , S/o. Narsimha, Aged about 37 yrs, Occ l\griculture, R/o AllapuramVillage. Naryanapur Mandal, yadadri- Bhuvanagiri Dijtrict.

25. Tekula_ Malla Reddy. S/o.Late.Sathi reddy. Aged abou.: 46 yrs Maior. Occ Agriculture R/o AttapuramVirrage. Naryanlpur-Mandar. '/adatiri- ahdvanagiri Diskict.

26. Tekula Kamalamma, Wo.Shiva reddy, Aged about 45 yrs Maior. Occ Agriculture. R/o. ArlapuramVilage, Naryanapur Mandar. 'rada<rri- arrrivinaEri Diskict.

27.Pakktu Alw_al Reddy Sio.Ram reddy, Aged about 55yrs Maior, Occ Agriculture. R/o AllapuramVillage, Naryinapur Mandal. ',adicl'_ Ahlvanagiri District

28.Surkanti Sathi Reddy S/o.pandaiah, Aged about 54v*; Maior. Occ Agncurture. R/o. Alapuramvilage. Naryanapur Mandar, \'ad-ac ri- Bhfuvinagiri District.

29.Tekula Shekar Reddy, S/o Papi Reddy, Aged about 34yrs !/ajor, Occ Agriculture, R/o. AllapJram Village, Naryanapur Mandal, Yadadri- Bhuvanagiri District. ...Petitioners I AND Sri Mamadi Krishna, Thasildar & Joint Sub Registrar, Narayanapur Mandal, Yadad ri-Bh uvanagiri ...Respondent lA NO:1 OF 2024 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 direction petitioner seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble court to issue a rule B process for securing the attendance of respondents/Contem nors. Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Veera Babu Gandu Counsel for the Respondent: Ms. Tekuri Swecha, ASST.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER Y I I I IION'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN C'ONTEMPTC ASE No.26360F 20:24 ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Tekuri Swecha, leame<i Assistant Government pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of the respondent.

2. This contempr case is fired alleging wiilful and deliberate violation of the order dated,04.10.2024 in W.p. No.2g007 o1,2024. 3. Vide the aforesaid order, this Court stayed all further proceedings pursuant to the notice dated 26.09.2024 issued by the respondent.

4. perusal ol record would reveal that respondent Nos.7 to 12 in W.P. No.28007 of 2024 have filed a writ petitio n t,ide W.p. No.25520 of 2024 craiming that they are the absolute owners and possessors ol the land admeasuring Acs.40.00 guntas in Survey No.l06124, situated at Rachakonda Village, Narayanapur Mandal, Yadadri - Bhongir District. They have submitted F-Line Appiications seeking survey of the said land. .Ihe same were not considered. Therefore, they have filed the said writ petition. Vide order dated, 13.09.2024, this Court disposed of the said writ petition direcring the j_------___..rn__ +--. I I 2 KL,J c c No 26t16 0i202.r Tahsildar, Narayanapur Mandal, to consider the F-Line Applications submitteci by the petitioners therein strictly in accordance with raw within forty five (45) days.

5. In compliance with the said order, the Tahsildar, Narayanapur Mandal, has issued survey notice dated 26.09.2024. Challenging the said notice, the petitioners filed the present writ petition i.e., W.P. No.28007 of 2024. Cor.rsidering the facr of pendency of suit vide O.S.No. 13 I of 2022 filed by respondent No.g therein against twelve petitioners and there is an interim injunction, this Court suspended the said notice dated 26.09.2024 on 04.10.2024. The said fact was informed to the respondent on 05.10.2024. Evett then, the respondent has conducted survey on 05.10.2024. Therefore, according to the petitioners, the respondent violated the said orders dated 04.10.2024 passed by this Courr in W.p. No.28007 of 2024.

6. The respondent has filed counter contending that on coming to know about the said order dated 04.10.2024, he has not conducted survey except visiting the subj ect property. Though the said counter was filed on 27.01.2025, the petitioners did not file any reply or rejoinder adverting to the same. To punish contemnors in terms of 7 \ To, ) KL,J CC llo 2636of2024 Section - 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, there should ber willful and deliberate violation of order under contempt. In the present case, there is no violation. much less wiltful and deliberate ordel. of the order under contempt. Thus, this contempt case is liable to be r:losed.

7. The present Contempt Case is accordingly closed. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if an1,, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY' Sd/- I. NAGA LAKSHMI UTY REGISTRAR D l=CTlr)N OFFICER

1. One CC to Sri Veera Babu Gandu, Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State c,f Telangana touTl

3. Two CD Copies w I I I -r:_ HIGH COURT DATED:0710212025 I ORDER CC.No.2636 of 2024 1HE til4 t q 1.f, rpn 216 !\\ t { t f,hrc r-t 1' THE CONTEMPT CASE IS CLOSED 9A