AMARAVATI, India, March 18 -- Andhra Pradesh High Court issued the following order on March 12:
1. This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the orders dated 24.02.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.5014 of 2025.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner filed the present contempt case under Sections 10 to 12, 14, 15 and 16 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the course of hearing the learned counsel for the respondents made a submission that the respondents are not taking any steps for laying of electrical poles at the petitioner's subject land as alleged by the petitioner. The said statement was made by the learned counsel for the respondents and was noted that as per the instructions of the respondents. Now, the respondents have violated their own submission made through counsel before this Court. Hence, the Contempt Case.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that as per the instructions obtained as on that day, he submitted the subject statement. He further submits that as per the instructions, the respondents are taking steps to lay electrical lines/poles within the road margin of R&B, but not at the petitioner's land. As per their understanding and as per the information furnished by the R&B Department, today, learned counsel for the respondents also submitted fresh instructions dated 22.01.2026, wherein, it is stated that the laying of electrical poles is within the road margin of the R&B department only, but not through the land of the petitioner. He further submits that if the petitioner still aggrieved by the same, the petitioner can make an application for joint inspection, identification and demarcation of the property between the petitioner and the R&B Department. As long as the poles were already erected within the road margin of the R&B, the action of laying of electrical poles at the petitioners land does not arise. 6. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties, it is observed that the mere statement of the learned counsel for the respondents in the writ petition, during hearing of the matter cannot be construed as an order and it cannot be enforced under the provisions of the Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. It is further observed that the said docket order is not observed as an undertaking or an assurance given by the learned counsel on behalf of the respondents, but it is a formal statement made by the learned counsel for the respondents upon the instructions that the respondents are not taking any steps for laying of electrical lines through the petitioner's land. Even as per the instructions as produced/ furnished today dated 22.01.2026, it indicates that laying of electrical poles was happened within the road margin of R&B road but not within the land of the petitioner.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=I1mmm2bl4r4EREhYK63Kv%2FflLPIDZeaop%2FQ5Tx0kCzF%2BQ0fa02%2B9JcP%2Fd7ihxO8k&caseno=CC/452/2026&cCode=1&cino=APHC010053632026&state_code=2&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
