Mr. Raj Kumar Goud, vs Ravinder Gulla And Another
2021 Latest Caselaw 3825 Tel

  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.

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.

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