Mohd. Shareef, v. Sri. Somesh Kumar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN

Present

Between:

Mohd. Shareef, S/o. Mohd. Ismail, Aged about 70 years, Occ: Business, R/o. 1/81, Serilingampally Street, Khawjaguda, R.R. District & 5 others .. Petitioners AND Sri Somesh Kumar, S/o. Not Known, District Collector, Hyderabad District, Office at: Nampally, Hyderabad & 3 others .. Respondents The Court made the following:

ORDER:

Case of the petitioner was in pursuant to the letter addressed by the Land Acquisition Officer, dated 27.01.2014, directing the petitioner to fix the boundaries of the plot claimed to have been owned by him, while petitioners were taking steps to fix the boundaries and even before the boundaries were fixed, the respondents started utilizing the land and dumping the material, which would wipe out the identity of the plot itself. Having regard to the said submissions, this Court passed interim orders in W.P.No.7662 of 2014 restraining the respondents from laying the road in open plot admeasuring Ac. 0.18 guntas in New Survey No.30 (Old Survey No.53), Bandamkunda, Khajaguda Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Alleging that the said order is violated by dumping loose soil over open land and levelled the same due to which identification of this plot has become difficult and marking of boundaries has become highly impossible, this contempt case is filed.

2. On behalf of respondents 3 and 4 in the writ petition, counter affidavit is filed. It is contended that men and machinery were engaged for removal of debris at the culvert in order to allow free flow of water through the culvert as a part of regular

maintenance but not for the purpose of construction of culvert. On the objection raised by the petitioner, even the men and machinery were removed from the site and no work was carried out till date thereafter.

3. Having regard to the said statement made in the counter affidavit and the fact that this Court only directed not to lay the road and even according to the petitioners, no road is laid after the interim orders are passed, I see no cause for initiating proceedings of contempt against the respondents. The Contempt Case is, accordingly, closed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this contempt case shall stand closed.

_________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date: 20th February, 2015 KL

Date: 20th February, 2015 KL