Gorla Yadaiah Yadav v. Mr. Bheemla Nayak

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.596 OF 2019 Dated:12.07.2019 Between:

Gorla Yadaiah, Yadav, S/o. Late Gorla Ramulu Yadav, Aged about 70 years, Senior Citizen, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.H.No.20-1-314/D, Koka Bazar, Gollakhidki, Hyderabad .. Petitioner And Mr. Bheemla Nayak, Surveyor, Land and Measurements, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and another .. Respondents This Court made the following:

- 2 - THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.596 OF 2019 ORDER:

Petitioner filed W.P.No.33530 of 2018 seeking to declare the action of the respondents in not conducting the survey of his land in Survey No.156 admeasuring Acs.5.19 guntas in Kacharam Village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and not considering his representation dated 02.04.2018, as illegal and arbitrary. When the Writ Petition came up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner informed the Court that though survey on the subject land was conducted, till that date no report was issued to the petitioner. In response to the said submission, learned Government Pleader for Revenue agreed to furnish a copy of the survey report. By order dated 18.09.2018, the said Writ Petition was disposed of directing the Tahsildar to communicate a copy of the survey report said to have been conducted within a period of ten or twelve days from that date.

2.

On 04.10.2018, petitioner made a representation to the Tahsildar, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, requesting him to conduct survey, as if direction was issued by this Court. The same was repeated in his subsequent representation. In the legal notice dated 14.03.2019 also, the same was again repeated. In other words, petitioner was making his case as if the Court directed to conduct survey and alleging that survey was not conducted, he filed this contempt case.

3.

A reading of the very representation and the legal notice would show that survey was not conducted when W.P.No.33530 of

- 3 - 2018 was disposed of. Furnishing survey report would arise only if survey was already conducted and/or if the Court directed to conduct survey. Thus, it cannot be said that there is violation, much less willful and deliberate, warranting initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent.

4.

The Contempt Case is accordingly closed and the contemnor is discharged.

____________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J Date:12.07.2019 KH