IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CONTEMPT CASE No.393 of 2008 (Contempt Case under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondents herein for violating, disobeying the judgment of the High Court dated 9.1.2008 in Writ Appeal No.1053 of2007) Between: Agnikula Kshatriya Sangam, Gudur, Represented by its Executive Member, V. Balakrishna, Chillakur Village & Mandal, Nellore District. ... Petitioner And 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endowments-IV) Department, Secretarait Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. Sri P. Surender Kumar, Commissioner of Endowments, Tilak Raod, Hyderabad. 3. Sri K. Janardhana Reddy, Manager, Sri Dharmarajaswamy Temple, Near Prasanna Venkateswaraswamy Temple Complex, Raja Street, Guduru Town, Nellore District, 4. The Municipal Commissioner, Guduru, Nellore District. 5. Nasina Nagulu, S/o. Krishnaiah, Narsingaraopet, Nellore District. (Respondent Nos.1, 4 & 5 are not necessary parties) ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri N. Vidya Prasad for Sri N. Ravi Prasad Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Government Pleader for Endowments Counsel for respondent No. 3 : Sri V.T.M. Prasad Counsel for respondent No.4 : None The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, C.J.) This contempt case has been filed alleging that the order dated 29th January, 2008 passed in Writ Appeal No.1053 of 2007 has not been duly complied with. By virtue of the said order, it was directed that respondent No.2 should consider the objections which might be filed by the appellant, and respondent No.3 should try to see that the temple is constructed preferably before May, 2008. It is the case of the appellant – petitioner in the contempt case that needful has not been done and the order of this Court has not been complied with. We have heard the learned Advocates and have perused the counter affidavits filed by respondent Nos.2 and 3. Upon perusal of the counter affidavits, we find that needful has been done for construction of the temple in question. However, it has been submitted that because of lack of funds, everything as was expected by the appellant has not been done. In the circumstances, we do not find that the order passed by this Court has not been duly complied with. However, we hope that as and when sufficient funds are available, needful shall be done for the betterment of the temple in question by respondent No.3. In the circumstances, the contempt petition is closed. ANIL R. DAVE, C.J. 28th August, 2009 GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA, J. To 1. The Principal Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Endowments-IV) Department, Secretarait Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. Sri P. Surender Kumar, Commissioner of Endowments, Tilak Raod, Hyderabad. 3. Sri K. Janardhana Reddy, Manager, Sri Dharmarajaswamy Temple, Near Prasanna Venkateswaraswamy Temple Complex, Raja Street, Guduru Town, Nellore District. 4. The Municipal Commissioner, Guduru, Nellore District. 5. Two copies to the Govt. Pleader for Endowments, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 6. Two C.D. copies. ARS