Nukathoti Peda Kondaiah, v. Sri Anil Chandra Punetha Ias

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.1283 of 2016 O R D E R:

Petitioner has filed this Contempt Case alleging willful disobedience of the order dt.22.03.2016 in W.P.MP.No.9408 of 2016 in W.P.No.7369 of 2016.

2.

By the said order, the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration was directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation dt.05.01.2015 within a period of two (02) weeks from that date and communicate his decision to the petitioner.

3.

In the said representation, petitioner had complained to the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration (respondent herein) about the non-issuance of Pattadar Pass Book for the land claimed by him in survey Nos.970, 9072 and 973 in Sunkireddipalem Village, Ponnalur Mandal, Prakasam District.

4.

In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, it is specifically stated that the representation of the petitioner was in fact received by his office on 22.08.2015, that he forwarded it to the District Collector on 28.09.2015, that he also issued reminder to the District Collector on 23.01.2016 to look into the matter; that the matter was then forwarded to the Tahsildar, Ponnalur Mandal, who passed orders vide

Endorsement dt.11.04.2016 rejecting the petitioner's request for issuance of Pattadar Pass Book on the ground that the land in question is non-agricultural land and he is not in possession of the said land.

5.

Counsel for petitioner contends that as per the circulars issued by Revenue Department, if issuance of Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deeds is delayed, compensation is payable to the petitioners and since no such compensation is paid and since the representation dt.05.01.2015 was not disposed of by the respondent, there is contempt committed by the respondent.

6.

This contention is without merit, because, firstly, the respondent herein is not the appropriate authority for issuance of Pattadar Pass Book, and secondly, the Tahsildar, Ponnalur Mandal, Prakasam District had rejected the petitioner's request for issuance of Pattadar Pass Book on 11.04.2016.

7.

When the petitioner is not entitled for issuance of Pattadar Pass Book according to the respondent, the question of compensating the petitioner in terms of money for the delay in disposing of the petitioner's request for issuance of Pattadar Pass Book does not arise.

8.

Therefore, I find no merit in this Contempt Case and it is accordingly dismissed with costs of Rs.1,000/-(Rupees One

thousand) to be paid to the High Court Legal Services Committee, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad For the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh. 9.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed.

_____________________________ M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO, J 02nd August, 2017.

gra