SUREDDI RAVEENDRA vs GOAPALA KRISHNA DWIVEDI,I.A.S

APHC010063152023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY,THE TWELTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 973/2023 Between: Sureddi Raveendra ...PETITIONER AND Goapala Krishna Dwivedi I A S and Others ...CONTEMNOR(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.

PRASANTHI GUDE Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1.

HARISH KUMAR RASINENI SC FOR SERP 2.

KIRAN KUMAR VADLAMUDI 3.

N SRIHARI (Standing Counsel for ZPP MPP and GRAM PANCHAYAT) The Court made the following order: The above contempt case is filed complaining of violation of the order dated 30.09.2022 in W.P.No.32360 of 2022.

2.

The petitioners filed the above writ petition to declare the action of the respondents in stopping disability pension without issuing any notice to the petitioner, even though the petitioner satisfied all the eligible criteria Page 2 of 3 SRS,J W.P.No.973 of 2023 enunciated under G.O.Ms.No.174 dated 13.12.2019, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (RD.I) Department, as illegal and arbitrary.

3.

The said writ petition was disposed of on 30.09.2022, observing that the issue involved in the said writ petition is covered by the order dated the decision reported in K.

Venkata laxmatnma vs.

State of Andhra Pradesh and others and batch1.

4.

In the affidavit filed in support of the contempt case, it was pleaded that despite the order, the respondents failed to pay the pension.

5.

Separate counter affidavits are filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and 5.

Along with the counter affidavit of respondent No.5, a copy of the speaking order passed vide Rc.No.41/2022/JA dated 04.11.2022, by respondent No.4, was annexed, wherein it was mentioned that the petitioner is not eligible for YSR Pension Kanuka.

6.

Given the speaking order passed by respondent No.4 in pursuance of the order dated 30.09. ted 30.09.2022, though some delay occurred, in the considered opinion of this court, the respondents did not violate the order dated 30.09.2022 in W.P.No.32360 of 2022.

7.

Therefore, this contempt case is closed, giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the speaking order passed by respondent No.4 vide Rc.No.41/2022/JA dated 04.11.2022, if aggrieved.

No costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 12.03.2025 IKN 1 2021 SCC Online AP 3010 Page 3 of 3 SRS,J W.P.No.973 of 2023 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 973 of 2023 Date: 12.03.2025 IKN