Smt. Kontham Madhavi v. Sri. D. Ronald Rose, I. A. S

[ 3166 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR CONTEMPT CASE No: 31 of 2024 Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 to summon, punish the respondents for his willful violation and deliberate disobedience of orders dated 13-10-2023 in W.P.No.28757 of 2023. Between:

Smt Kontham Madhavi, Wo Kontham Mlalla Reddy, aged about 39 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o H. No. 4- 12- 893, Piot No. 64, Sai Nagar, Near Rajadhanr Hotel, Vanastalipuram. Ranga Reddy District.

...Petitioner/Petitioner

AI{D '1 . Sri. D. Ronald Rose, i. A. S, Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Lower Tank Bund, Hyderabad.

2. Sri P. Ravinder Kumar, Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporalion, Hayathnagar Circle No- 3, Hyderabad.

3. Smt. G. Pavani, Town Planning Officer, O/o. Dy. Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hayathnagar Circle No. 3, Hyderabad. :

.Respondents/Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri A. Narasimaha Rao Counsel for the Respondents: Sri M. Durga Prasad (SC FOR GHMC) The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HON'BLE SRI ]USTICE T, VINOD KUMAR Contempt Case No.31 of 2O24 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents - GHMC and perused the record. 2.

This Contempt Case is directed alleging willful disobedience and non-compliance of the order of this Court dt.13.10.2023 passed in W.P.No.2B757 of 2023.

3.

Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri Srinivas Rao Pachwa, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, has placed beFore this Court the written instructions along with four photographs taken on A4 sheet showing the respondentsauthorities having undeftaken demolition of the unauthorized construction made, which is the subject matter of the writ petition, on 18.11.2024 at L7.22 Alvl., and the authorities having demolished the entire length of the compound wall constructed.

4.

Learned Standing Counsel thus submits that the authorities having demolished the construction of entire length of compound wall, there exists no compound wall now, and thus, the construction made by encroaching on to the footpath margin has been removed and thus, the respondents have complied with the order of this Court. 5.

The aforesaid written instructions along with the photographs as placed before this Court are taken on record. 6.

Having regard to the aforesaid submissions and that the respondents-a uthorities having initiated action to remove the unauthorized construction as directed by this Couft in the order dt.13.10.2023 in

t W.P.No.2B757 of 2023, this Court is of the view that the respondents_ authorities have suFFicienUy complied with the order of this Court. 7.

Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. No order as to costs. B.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this contempt case s stand closed.

II SD/- K. SA ESHI DEPUTY REGI TRAR \ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to Sri ,A. Narasimaha Rao, Advocate IOPUC]

2. One CC to Sri itl. Durga Prasad (SC FOR GHMC) IOPUCI

3. Two CD Copies kan-r/PSL w

HIGH COURT DATED:2814212025 .-11 S I tt /rt'

)rl i t o;5p6rc

ORDER

0 1 !,i[\ 2[25 i'

CC.No.31 of 2A24 CLOSING OF THE CONTEMPT CASE 6.o?@ &"