V. RENUKA vs SRI KRUPA RAO

APHC010379612023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 4314/2023 Between: 1.

V.

RENUKA, W/O.

RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, AGED 27 YEARS, R/O.

NARAYANAPALLI VILLAGE, ARDHAVEEDU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.

SRI KRUPA RAO, DISTRICT PROJECT MANAGER, DRDA VELUGU, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

2.

SRI C RAVI KUMAR, PROJECT DIRECTOR, DRDA VELUGU, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

3.

SRI N RAMA YOGAIAH, ASSISTANT PROJECT MANAGER, DRDA VELUGU, ARDHAVEEDU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

4.

SMT E NIRMALA, DISTRICT SAMAIKYA PRESIDENT, DRDA VELUGU, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

5.

SMT D RANGAMMA, MANDALA SAMAIKYA PRESIDENT, DRDA VELUGU, ARDHAVEEDU, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ...CONTEMNOR(S): Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may be pleased to punish the respondents herein under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for willful, wanton, and deliberate violation of the judgment of this Hon'ble Court dated 27.06.2023 made in WP No.13264 of 2023 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.

V VINOD K REDDY Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1.

HARISH KUMAR RASINENI SC FOR SERP 2.

MADAMANCHI SRINIVASA RAO The Court made the following: ::ORDER:: The above contempt case is filed complaining the violation of interim order dated 27.06.2023 in W.P.No.13264 of 2023.

W.P.No.13264 of 2023 was filed seeking the following relief: “…to issue any writ, order or direction preferably a writ in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not allowing the petitioner to discharge the duties as VOA, Narayanapalli Village, Vijaya Group, Ardhaveddu Mandal, Prakasam District and not paying salary since May 2022 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of articles 14, 21 and also violative of principle principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to discharge the duties as VOA, Narayanapalli Village, Vijaya Group, Ardhaveddu Mandal, Prakasam District and to pay salary since May 2022..” 3.

By order dated 27.06.2023, learned Single Judge directed the respondents 3 and 8 i.e., the District Project Manager, Prakasam District and the Assistant Project Manager, Prakasam District, not to interfere with the duties of petitioner in service.

Complaining the violation of the order the above contempt case is filed.

Sri Sudhakhar, learned counsel representing Sri V.Vinod K Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, despite the order passed by this Court, respondents 1 to 5 did not allow the petitioner to discharge the duties as VOA.

Prima-facie, arraying all five respondents in the above contempt case, in the opinion of this Court is not permissible.

A direction was issued against respondents 3 and 8 i.e., contemnors 1 and 3 herein.

6.

In the counter-affidavit filed by respondents 1 and 5, it was stated that respondents are not interfering with the petitioner discharge of duties as VOA.

It was specifically referred to Circular No.64-7/SERP/IB/2019, dated 29.08.2018, issued by the SERP.

On perusal of the said circular, it would indicate that the society will elect or appoint one member among them as VOA for a period of three years.

The authorities are nothing to do with the selection or appointment or discharge of duties as VOA.

7.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court by inquiry proceedings of Project Director, DRDA, YSRKP, Ongole, Prakasham District vide R.C.No.IB/152022, dated 03.11.2022 filed along with counter- affidavit of 5th respondent.

Even a perusal of the said report does not indicate interference by respondents 3 and 8.

8.

The petitioner failed to demonstrate violation of the order passed by the Court dated 27.06.2023.

7.06.2023.

Hence, this Court doesn’t find any merit in the contempt case.

9.

Accordingly, the contempt case is closed.

No costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand dismissed. ________________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Dated: 18.10.2024 SNI 213 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE No.4314 OF 2023 Dated: 18.10.2024 SNI