APHC010254202019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3331]

THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 653/2019

Between:

D.saibabu ...PETITIONER

AND

V Koteswaramma ...CONTEMNOR

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.G V SHIVAJI

Counsel for the Contemnor:

1.K MADHAVA REDDY (SC FOR ENDOWMENTS AR)

The Court made the following ORDER:

The above contempt case is filed complaining about the nonimplementation of the order dated 28.10.2015 in W.P.No.27423 of 2012.

Today, when the matter is listed, it is brought to the notice of this Court that Smt. V. Koteswaramma, the respondent, has been transferred and the present incumbent is one Sri K. Rama Chandra Mohan, Executive Officer of Sri Durga Malleswara Swamy Varla Devasthanam, Vijayawada.

In view of change of the officer, Sri K. Rama Chandra Mohan, Executive Officer of Sri Durga Malleswara Swamy Varla Devasthanam, Vijayawada, is suo-moto impleaded as respondent No.2.

The Registry is directed to carry out the necessary amendments in the contempt case as well as in the interlocutory applications, if any and issue notice to respondent No.2.

List the matter on 03.04.2025.

________________________ SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J

I.A.No.1 of 2020

This application is filed to implead the proposed respondent as respondent No.2 in the contempt case.

Since the present incumbent by name Sri K. Rama Chandra Mohan, Executive Officer of Sri Durga Malleswara Swamy Varla Devasthanam, Vijayawada, is suo-moto impleaded as respondent No.2, no further orders are required in this application.

Accordingly, this interlocutory application is closed.

________________________ SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J

I.A.No.1 of 2021

This application is filed to implead the proposed respondent as respondent No.3 in the contempt case.

Since there is no direction against the proposed respondent i.e. the Commissioner of Endowments, as per the order dated 28.10.2015 in W.P.No.27423 of 2012, impleading the proposed respondent in the contempt case, is not necessary.

Accordingly, this interlocutory application is closed.

________________________ SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J

Dated: 06.03.2025 TVN