Chennareddy Satish Reddy, Spsr Nellore Dist. And 3 Others v. Koteswara Rao, Spsr Nellore Dist.

Date: 19.06.2018 Between:

Chennareddy Satish Reddy s/o. Swamynath Reddy, Aged about 55 years, r/o. Srinivasa Agraharam, D.No.16/1846, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District and three others.

.....Petitioners and Sri Koteswara Rao, the Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Nellore, SPSR Nellore district. .....Respondent The Court made the following:

ORDER:

On 26.09.2014, this Court passed the following order in W.P.No.27701 of 2014:

"Issue notice before admission returnable in three weeks.

Post after three weeks.

It is alleged that the land acquisition proceedings are not initiated following due process of law. The respondents are seeking to utilize the land of the petitioners for digging a canal. The respondents shall not undertake any digging work in Survey Nos.2292/2-2, 2292/2B, 2294/1, 2309/2, 2310/2B and 2306/2 till 31.10.2014."

2.

Alleging that in spite of interim order of the Court, respondents are resorting to digging of canal and undertaking construction of bridge, this contempt case is filed. 3.

In the counter-affidavit, the allegation of digging of canal is denied. It is stated that only bridge is constructed over the canal and no digging work is going on as alleged. It is further stated that the bridge, which petitioners are referring to, is constructed across the existing Kanupur branch canal (Idimepalli branch canal) to facilitate the movement of the farmers. On the specific assertion of the respondents there is no denial. After filing of additional counter-affidavit, several adjournments were granted at the request of learned counsel for petitioners, but no reply is filed. 4.

As can be seen from the order extracted above, direction was only against digging of canal. Respondents categorically asserted that canal is not being dug after interim order was passed. They

also asserted that only bridge is constructed on a canal, which is connecting to Kanupur village, to facilitate the movement of farmers and villagers at their request. This contention of respondents is not denied. No case is made out for initiating contempt proceedings. It cannot be said that there was wilful and deliberate violation of the direction of the Court, warranting initiation of contempt proceedings. Contempt Case is accordingly closed. Pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed. No costs.

___________________________ JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO Date: 19.06.2018 kkm

Date: 19.06.2018 kkm