Paddi Rathnaiah v. Smt M. Janaki,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.2109 OF 2015 ORDER:

This Contempt Case is filed alleging violation of the orders dated 03.09.2015 passed by this Court in WP.No.28497 of 2015, wherein this Court directed the petitioners to submit their appropriate claim with necessary documents and also directed the 3rd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, to examine the same and take appropriate decision. Sri A.Sudershan Reddy, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submits that though the petitioners made application, without considering the same and without taking into account the documents filed by the petitioners, the order dated 19.10.2015 was passed. He also submits that the respondents failed to consider the claim of the petitioners as per the directions in the writ petition. Hence the respondents have committed contempt. He further submits that the petitioners are in occupation of the said land for the last more than forty years.

On the other hand learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that the petitioners made constructions subsequent to issuing of the notification with a view to get compensation, as such they are not entitled for compensation.

He also submits that the order dated 19.10.2015 was passed after considering the claim of the petitioners. This Court passed order dated 03.09.2015 in WP.No.28497 of 2015, directing the petitioners to submit their appropriate claim with necessary documents and also directed the 3rd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, to examine the same and take appropriate action. In pursuance of the said order, the petitioners submitted their application and the 3rd respondent issued proceedings dated 19.10.2015. As such, it cannot be said that contempt has been committed by the respondents. Even according to the contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, if the impugned order is an erroneous one, the same can be challenged. But, this Court cannot go into the correctness of the order in the Contempt Case. In view of the same, I do not see any reason to entertain the Contempt Case.

Accordingly, the contempt case is dismissed. However, it is open for the petitioners to challenge the proceedings dated 19.10.2015. No order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the contempt case, shall stand closed. _____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 31.10.2016 t k.