Sarvasetty Badrinarayana, v. D. Vijayamma,

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY C.C. No. 2681 of 2017 ORDER :

This Contempt Case is filed against respondent alleging violation of order dated 10.11.2017 in W.P. No.38016 of 2017, wherein this Court granted order of status quo. Counter affidavit is filed by the respondent stating that immediately after knowing about the filing of writ petition and granting of status quo order by the petitioner, he contacted the Standing Counsel and came to know that this Court granted order of status quo, he left the spot without execution of work and stopped further action. That the petitioner himself removed some part of the encroachment and filed the present writ petition and that the others have cooperated for removal of structures. It is clearly stated in the counter affidavit that the respondent has not received any interim order till today, but stopped the demolition and further action when they received information from the Standing Counsel about the order of status quo passed by this Court. No reply affidavit is filed disputing the averments in the counter affidavit.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent.

Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to submit that the petitioner himself demolished some part of the structures

on his own and the respondent had demolished other structures in spite of status quo order passed by this Court. When the respondent asserted in her counter affidavit that she had not demolished the property of the petitioner, after passing of order of status quo by this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner has not seriously disputed the said averment by filing reply affidavit. As such, the petitioner failed to establish that the respondent demolished his property, after passing of order of status quo by this Court. In view of same, it is very difficult to come to a conclusion that the respondent has violated the order of status quo passed by this Court. As such, I do not see any violation of orders passed by this Court and accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondent, he can avail remedies available to him under law. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Contempt Case, shall stands dismissed.

____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 12.03.2018 kvs

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY C.C. No.2681 OF 2017 Date: 12-03-2018 kvs