P.Dhana Lakshmi vs. N.Satish Kumar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

CONTEMPT CASE No. 2058 of 2021

Between :-

P. Dhana Lakshmi, W/o. K. Srinivas, Aged 42 years, Occ: Temple Employee, R/o. Lakshmi Balaji Towers, Eepuru Village, Pedapadu Mandal, East Godavari District.

...Petitioner

AND

N. Satish Kumar, Executive Officer, Sri Abhaya Anjaneya Swamy Temple, Appanaveedu Village, Pedapadu Mandal, West Godavari District.

...Respondent

WHEREAS the Petitioner has presented the Case under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, through her Counsel Sri Mannem Venkata Krishna, praying the High Court to punish the respondent herein for the willful, deliberate and wanton violation of the orders dt: 09-11-2020 and dt.09-12-2020 of this Hon'ble Court made in I.A.No. 1/2020 in W.P.No. 18897/2020.

WHEREAS the said case coming on for hearing, and whereas the High Court, upon perusing the affidavit filed therein and earlier orders of this High Court dt. 10-12-2021, 20-01-2022, 18-02-2022 and 24-02-2022 made herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Mannem Venkata Krishna, Advocate for the petitioner, of Sri Mannem Venkata Krishna, Advocate representing for Respondent No. 1 and of Sri M.V. Krishna Rao, Advocate for sole respondent, Court made the following

ORDER :-

Sri N. Satish Kumar, Executive Officer, Sri Abhaya Anjaneya Swamy 1. Temple, Appanaveedu Village, Pedapadu Mandal, West Godavari District, the respondent herein is present in person.

The matter was fixed today for framing of charges in view of the order $\mathbf{2}$ . 24.02.2022. As this Court found that on the material before the Court, prima facie case for willful disobedience of the orders 09.11.2020 and 09.12.2020 in the writ petition as made out.

3. Respondent has filed the counter affidavit.

$4.$ After arguing at length, making an effort to justify the action of the respondents, Sri Mannam Venkata Krishna Rao, learned counsel for the respondent submits that there was bonafidy mistake on the part of the respondent in undertaking the interim orders passed by this Court on consequently the recovery proceedings by order dated 19.07.2021 were initiated and the amount w.e.f. March, 2021 upto November, 2021 was recovered from the petitioner.

5. The interim orders are clear. Operation of the impugned orders dated 04.09.2020 and 01.10.2020 was suspended. There is nothing which could not be understood correctly. In case of my understanding to the contrary by respondent, he could have asked for legal advice, but on such understanding could not have disobeyed the interim orders.

6. Sri Mannam Venkata Krishna Rao, learned counsel submits that the respondent present in person undertakes that the amount recovered from the petitioner pursuant to the order dated 19.07.2021 shall be refunded to the petitioner within a period of two $(02)$ weeks, positively by 24.03.2022.

7. List on 25.03.2022, in terms of the order dated 24.02.2022.

8. The Respondent shall remain personally present on the date fixed.

Sd/- M. RAMESH BABU, DEPUTY REGISTRAR

//True Copy//

SECTION OFFICER

To

• 1.N. Satish Kumar, Executive Officer, Sri Abhaya Anjaneya Swamy Temple, Appanaveedu Village, Pedapadu Mandal, West Godavari District. (By Speed Post/Fax with a direction to appear before this Hon'ble Court on 25.03.2022 at 10:30 AM)
• 2. One CC to Sri Mannem Venkata Krishna, Advocate [OPUC]
• 3. One CC to Sri M.V. Krishna Rao, Advocate(OPUC)

4. One Spare Copy.

TKK

HIGH COURT

RNT.J

DATE:10-03-2022

ORDER

C.C. No. 2058 of 2021.

DIRECTION