Sanju Singh v. Sri. D.S. Lokesh Kumar And 4 Others
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY CONTEMPT CASE NO: 903 OF 2020 Contempt Case filed Under Sections 10 to 't2 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondent herein for his willful violation and deliberate disobedience of the Orders of the High Court made in W.P.No.15719 o't 2020 dated 16.09.2020.
Between:
Sanju Singh, S/o. Late. Kalyan Singh, Aged. 45 years, Occ. Business, R/o, H.No 1 1-1-1 119, Afzal Sagar, Mallepally, Hyderabad.
...Petitioner
AND
1. Sri. D.S. Lokesh Kumar, The Commissioner GHMC, Hyderabad.
2. tr,4s. P. Pravinya, The Zonal Commissioner, Ctcle - 12, Khairatabad, Hyderabad
3. Sri lnkeshaf AIi, The Deputy Commissioner, Ctcle - 12, Khairatabad, Hyderabad.
4. V. Madhavi, The Assistant City Planner, Town Planning Section, Ctcle - 12' Khairatabad, Hyderabad.
5. Smt. Sultana Begum, Wo. Not known to the Petitioner, age Major, Occ Business, R/o. Hl No. 11-1-116112, Afzal Sagar, Mallepally, Hyderabad. ..Co nte m n o rs/Res po n d e nts Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI L. RAM SINGH Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: SRI N. ASHOK KUMAR (standing council) Counsel ofthe Respondent No. 5: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following: ORDER
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY Contemp t Case No.903 of2020 ORDER:
This contempt case is filed seeking to punish the respondents/contemnors for disobedience of the orders of this Court in W.P.No 157'1 9 oI 2O2O dated 16.09.2020, wherein and whereby this Court directed respondent Nos.2 to 6 to take appropriate action on the representation dated 06.09.2020 of the petitioner and also ensure that the unofficial respondent No.7 shall not make constructions by encroaching the public road and causing damage to the property of the petitioner.
2.
At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 16.09.2020 in W.P.No.15719 of 2020 has been complied with by the respondents and as such, no further orders are required to be passed in this contempt case.
3.
Recording the aforesaid submission, the Contempt Case is closed. No order as to costs.
I SD/- K.SRINIVASA R DEPUTY REGIS //TRUE COPY// o R To, SECTION OFFICER 1 P.ri ? S_ Lokesh Kumar, The Commissioner GHtr,4C, Hyderabad. ? Yr p Pravrnya, The Zonal Commissioner, Circle _ t Z,-Khairatabad, Hyderabad.
3. Sri lnkeshaf Ari, The Deputy commissioner, ctcre - i2, Khairatabad, riyoerauaa.
4. V. tt4adhavl, The Assistant City planner, Town planning Section, Ctcle - 12, Khairatabad, Hyderabad.
5. Smt Sultana Begum, W/o. Not known to the petitioner, age lViajor, Occ. Business, R/o. H. N. 11-1-j16j12, Afzal Sagar, tr/allepalty, Hyderabad.
6. One CC to Sri L. Ram Singh, Advocate tOpUCl
7. One CC to Sri N. Ashok Kumar, Advocaie [OpUC]
8. Two CD Copies Jt"<Ny
HIGH COURT ARRJ DATED:2811212020 .t , AI s e o-:
0 6 JAir 2021
ORDER
CC.No.903 of 2020 -'
,.i o I CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE W]THOUT COSTS 5\ +jv