← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaCC/2395/2016closed no costs

Sri Ramswaroop Agarwal, v. B Janardhan Reddy,

2017-06-12P Naveen Rao4 pages

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO Between:

Sri Ramswaroop Agarwal, s/o late Devaram, Aged about 80 years, Occu: Business, R/o 14-2-398/8, Razakpuram, Goshamahal, Hyderabad.

.....Petitioner and B.Janardhan Reddy, Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, RKR Bhavan, Hyderabad.

.....Respondent The Court made the following:

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO ORDER:

Petitioner instituted this contempt alleging violation of directions of the Court in W.P.No.36327 of 2013 and batch, dated 14.10.2015.

2.

As seen from the judgment of this Court, the aggrieved parties were given liberty to prefer appeal against the proceedings of the respondent-Corporation, dated 27.12.2013, by fixing time schedule and consideration of the appeals, if any appeals are filed. 3.

Counsel for petitioner Sri V.M.M.Chary contends that no appeals are filed within the time granted and the order of respondent-Corporation dated 27.12.2013 has become final, but the same is not implemented and enforced and, therefore, the said action amounts to committing contempt of order of this Court in the batch of writ petitions.

4.

Bare perusal of the direction issued in paragraph-26 of the judgment would show that it only granted liberty to the parties aggrieved by the proceedings dated 27.12.2013 to prefer appeal. No further directions were issued for compliance of the said proceedings, if no appeal was preferred. Petitioner herein, the 2nd respondent in the writ petition, seeking enforcement of the proceedings dated 27.12.2013. He cannot complain of committing contempt of the orders in the instant writ petition by the respondents on the ground that said proceedings are not enforced by the respondent-corporation. Since no such direction was

issued, no contempt case is made out. Contempt case is closed. It is open to the petitioner to work out his remedies as available in law against alleged inaction on the part of respondent-corporation in seeking enforcement of its own order passed earlier, which was the subject matter of batch of writ petitions. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this contempt case shall stand closed.

___________________________ JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO kkm

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO kkm