THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY
CONTEMPT APPEAL No.16 of 2020
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present contempt appeal is arising out of order
dated 07.02.2020 passed in C.C.No.2465 of 2018 by the
learned Single Judge.
The facts of the case reveal that a writ petition was
preferred i.e., W.P.No.12294 of 2018 alleging illegal
constructions undertaken by respondent Nos.4 to 10 therein
and an interim order was passed on 24.04.2018. The interim order reveals that respondent No.3/Bachupally Grampanchayat was directed to ensure that no construction activities are carried out by respondent Nos.4 to 10/writ petitioners. Later on, a contempt petition was preferred stating that the appellant before this Court permitted the constructions to proceed resulting in violation of the order passed by the learned Single Judge and in those circumstances, an order has been passed on 07.02.2021 sentencing the appellant to undergo one month imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,000/- and the appellant was also directed to pay costs of Rs.20,000/- to the writ petitioners. Against the aforesaid order, the present contempt appeal has been filed.
2
The appellant is present and, at the outset, he tendered unconditional apology for any act of omission done inadvertently which may amount to disobedience of the order dated 24.04.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge. The order passed in C.C.No.2465 of 2018 reveals that the interim order was passed on 24.04.2018. It was brought to the notice of the appellant on 02.05.2018 and after obtaining instructions from the higher authorities, a show cause notice was issued on 14.05.2018 to respondent Nos.4 to 10 of the writ petition. There is no material available on record nor any finding has been arrived at by the learned Single Judge to establish that construction took place after 24.04.2018. In the counter filed in contempt case i.e., C.C.No.2465 of 2018 there was a categoric averment made by the contemnor that no constructions were carried out after the interim order was passed by the learned Single Judge.
In the light of the aforesaid, this Court is of the opinion that as no finding of fact has been arrived at by the learned Single Judge in respect of the construction after 24.04.2018, a proper notice was issued by the appellant. In the light of the unconditional apology tendered by the appellant, this Court is of the opinion that the order passed by the learned Single Judge sentencing imprisonment of one month and a fine of Rs.2,000/- deserve to be set aside and is accordingly set aside.
Accordingly, the contempt appeal stands allowed. 3 At this stage, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the appellant has paid the costs of Rs.20,000/- to the writ petitioner. The costs paid be refunded back to the appellant by the writ petitioner within a period of 30 days from today. This Court has not expressed anything on merits so far as the main writ petition is concerned and the parties shall be free to approach the learned Single Judge for an early hearing of the main writ petition.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ ______________________________ A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 29.11.2021 ES