IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABD

FRIDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1055 OF 2025

Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 to punish the respondents herein for willful disobedience and for violation of the order dated 04.07.2024 in W.P.No.20593 of 2021.

Between:

Sri.J.Ram Reddy, S/o.Late.J.Chitta Reddy Aged about 67 years, Occ Business, R/o.H.No.1-10-309, C.R.Colony, New Bowenpally, Secunderabad-11.

...PETITIONER

AND

Mr Madhukar Naik, The Chief Executive Officer, Secunderabad Cantonment Board, Secunderabad

...CONTEMNORS

Counsel for the Petitioner :Sri. Srinivas Velagapudi

Counsel for the Respondent: K.R. Koteswara Rao

The Court made the following: ORDER

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY CONTEMFT CASE No.1OS5 of 2o25

ORDER:

I

\

This Contempt Case is filed alleging violation c,l the order, dated 04.O7.2O24 passed in W.p.No.2O593 ol 2021.

2. This Court, by an order, d ated 04.OT .2024 winllr. disposing ol the said Wnr Pctition directed respondent Nos.2 an<l 3 therein to proceed u.ith thc construction after obtaining necessary permission and il cleviafion of the said constructiorLs are not permissible for regularization, respondent No. 1 therein was directed to examine and consider the representations, dated 19.07.2027 and 3O.O7.2O2 I submitted by rhe petitioner and pass appropriate orders after hearing the petitioner lls well as respondent Nos.2 and 3 therein as per the provisions of the Cantonment Act, 2O06 and in accordance with law.

I I

3. Sri K.R.Kotesu,ara Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondent herein has submitted that in terms of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.20593 of 2O2l resporrdent had examined the representations, dated 19.OT .2021 and 3O.O7 .2021 and passed a reasoned order and comntunicated the same to the pe titioner.

CVBR, ^J cc 1055 2025 1

4. In view of the above submission and since it is stated that the respondent had already passed an order, the validity or otherwise of the merits of the order cannot be examined in the contempt proceedings. If the petitioner.is aggrieved by the said rejection order, he is at liberty to avail the remedies as available under law

Accordingly, this Contempt Case is closed No costs ⁵

Miscellaneous petitioi\s, if any, shall stand closed'

,,TRUE COPY/'

SECTION OFFTCER

SD,. A.V,S. PRASAD PUTY REGISTRAR

To,

One CC to UC] SRl. SRINIVAS VELAGAPUDI Advocate [OP

1 2 One CC to SRI Advocate IOPUCI

3. Two CD CoPies

(tr

CMN

HIGH COURT

DATED:02/05/2025

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

STATE OR THE STATE OR THE STATE OR THE STATE OR THE STATE OR THE STATE OR THE STATE OR THE STATE OR THE STATE OR THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE OF THE STATE

ORDER

CC.No.1055 of 2025

THE CONTEMPT CASE IS CLOSED