Sylven Valley Plot Owners Welfare Association, v. Sri M. Venkateswarlu, M.Sc., B.Ed.,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT C.C.No.1204 OF 2015 ORDER:

Heard Mr.P.Chadrasekhar Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.Bhasker Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Revenue for sole respondent. The petitioner filed the instant contempt case complaining disobedience of the order dated 12.02.2014 in W.P.No.19371 of 2009. The relevant portion of the order reads as follows: "It is needless to observe that due to subsequent circumstances and also the purchase of plots by the members of petitioner Association, the members claim to have subsisting interest in the matter. The appellate authority considers issuing notice to the petitioners before disposing of the matter. As this is an old matter, the 5th respondent is directed to dispose of the appeal on remand within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order".

The case of petitioner is that respondent has disposed of the case pending in file No.C/597/2014 dated 30.05.2014 without issuing notice to the members of petitioner association and such disposal amounts to disobeying the order of this Court. On 10.07.2015, notice to respondent was ordered. The respondent has filed counter affidavit explaining the circumstances under which a mistake had happened in disposing of case pending in file No.C/597/2014. This Court directed production of original record to verify the stand taken in the counter affidavit and the record is perused. Today, at the time of hearing, Government Pleader submits that the petitioner filed revision petition under Section 9 of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 against the order dated 30.05.2014 and the revision in case No.

D1/323/15 was allowed by order dated 22.01.2016 remanding the case for fresh disposal by the respondent. With the order passed by the revisional authority, the intended or unintended omission that has occasioned with the passing of the order dated 30.05.2014 is set aside. The revisional authority issued further appropriate directions to the respondent herein to act as directed by this Court in W.P.No.19371 of 2009. After perusing the original file produced by the Government Pleader and also the stand taken in the counter affidavit, the contempt is not pursued by this Court, but this Court certainly expects the respondent to be careful and vigilant in disposing of the files which are taken up pursuant to the orders of Court of law, including constitutional Courts.

Accepting the excuse stated in the counter affidavit and having regard to the subsequent developments, I do not propose to proceed further in the matter. Contempt case is, accordingly, closed. No costs. Consequently, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, also stand disposed of. _______________ S.V.BHATT, J Date:29.01.2016 Lrkm