Sri Mohd. Zama, v. Sri Bhima Naik,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO CC. No.1496 of 2018 O R D E R:

Petitioner has filed this Contempt Case alleging that the respondent herein who was 4th respondent in the Writ Petition has violated the order dt.27.04.2016 in WP.MP.No.18009 of 2016 in W.P.No.14456 of 2016. 2.

A perusal of the said order indicates that the direction in the said interim order is only to 3rd respondent in the Writ Petition i.e., the District Collector, and not to the 4th respondent therein who is the respondent in this Contempt Case.

3.

In this view of the matter, I see no reason to punish the respondent for Contempt of Court.

4.

Therefore, the Contempt Case is closed. However, if the petitioner is so advised, he can file a Contempt Case against the 3rd respondent. No order as to costs.

5.

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

_____________________________ M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO, J 24th September, 2018.

gra