Satish Nainala, v. Mr.Ali Moosa Razvi,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Contempt Case No.1325 of 2015 Date: 01-09-2015 Between:

Satish Nainala .... Petitioner AND Ali Moosa Razvi and 2 others .... Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Contempt Case No.1325 of 2015 ORDER:

This contempt case is filed alleging violation of the order dated 11-06-2014 passed in W.P.No.15345 of 2014 by the respondents, directing not to evict the petitioner from the hostel premises till submission of thesis. The present contempt case is filed stating that even though the said interim order is subsisting, the petitioner is evicted from the hostel premises by the respondents wantonly and deliberately, which amounts to violation of the orders dated 11-06-2014 in W.P.No.15345 of 2014. 2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for respondents 1 to 3.

3. Learned standing counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 stated that final orders are passed in WPMP.No.19008 of 2014 in W.P.No.15345 of 2014 on 03-07-2014, directing the petitioner to file an appeal before the Vice Chancellor, who will consider the same and till such time, the respondents are directed to allow the

petitioner to avail library facility on condition of the petitioner abiding by the undertaking given by him. She further stated that there was no order for staying eviction of the petitioner except permitting him to avail the library facility. Therefore, pursuant to the said orders, the petitioner is permitting only to avail the library facility.

4.

The perusal of the order in WPMP.No.19008 of 2014 in W.P.No.15346 of 2014 shows that the petitioner is permitted only to avail library facility and there was no order for staying eviction of the petitioner. When the final orders are passed, the interim orders passed earlier get merged with the final order. 5.

In view of the same, I do not find any commission of violation of the order dated 11-06-2014 by the respondents, and hence, the contempt case is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. No costs. _____________________ A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J Date: 01-09-2015 Ksn