Madireddy Narender Reddy v. Sri S.K. Joshi, I.A.S.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

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

Present

Between:

Madireddy Narender Reddy, S/o. Late Madireddy Rangareddy, Aged 45 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Villa No.124, Aparna County, Hafeezpet Village, Miyapur, Hyderabad-500 049 & another.

.. Petitioners AND Sri S.K. Joshi, IAS, State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Adminsitration & Urban Development, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad & 4 others .. Respondents The Court made the following:

ORDER:

By way of an interim order in W.P.No.5445 of 2014, this Court directed maintenance of status quo obtaining as on 04.08.2014 with reference to the petitioners' premises in Door No.1-11-251/1B to an extent of 125.28 square meters in Survey Nos.56, 57 and 58, covered in Ward No.1, Block No.11, at Begumpet, Hyderabad. The order was initially granted for a period of four (4) weeks and extended from time to time. Alleging that in spite of the order of status quo passed by this Court, the Concessionaire of the respondent Metro Rail Project dumped some material in the concerned property, this contempt case is filed.

2. When the matter is taken up, learned Standing Counsel representing the Hyderabad Metro Rail Limited informed the Court that the Concessionaire erroneously dumped the material and the interim orders of this Court was brought to his notice and, accordingly, the entire material was removed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners apprehends that the respondent may dump such material in future also. It is needless to observe that as long as the order of status quo obtaining as on 04.08.2014 is in operation, the status quo should

be maintained and no violation of the said order should be invited even by Concessionaire and by the respondents including the Hyderabad Metro Rail Limited.

4. Having regard to the fact that the material is already removed and the status quo is restored, I do not see any justification to proceed further in this contempt. 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: 27th February, 2015 KL

Date: 27th February, 2015 KL