HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.157 OF 2011 ORDER: This contempt of Court action is initiated on the premises that the respondent-Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation has violated willfully and deliberately the orders passed by this Court on 06.10.2010 passed in W.P.No.25253 of 2010. 2. Pursuant to the notice issued on 23.02.2011 in the above matter, the Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation has filed a detailed counter affidavit. The case of the petitioners is that the proposed site has fallen in Survey Nos. 349/9, 349/12, 371/1, 371/2 of Narava village. It is also their case that Employees Residential Welfare Society, through an unauthorized layout has demarcated the particular land as a road margin. It is stated that notice dated 23.10.2010 addressed to the first petitioner Sri M. Madhusudhana Rao by the Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation requiring him to produce his title deeds pertaining to the land in question within fifteen days. The said notice dated 23.10.2010 has been enclosed to the counter affidavit. However, Sri T.P. Acharya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has pointed out that this notice dated 23.10.2010 has not been received by the first petitioner so far and it is for the first time brought to light. 3. Be that as it may, the Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation has directed the petitioner to produce the title deeds in respect of the claim before them and establish his right title and interest over the land in question, it is only appropriate for the petitioner to take the proceedings initiated by the respondents on 23.10.2010 to a logical conclusion. 4. If the petitioner produces the necessary material, in furtherance of the notice issued by them on 23.10.2010, the same will be properly examined and appropriate decision be taken thereon within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt of any such material from the first petitioner or on his behalf by any other petitioners herein. The contempt of Court action is therefore disposed of in the above terms without any costs. __________________________________ Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao September 12, 2011 SP HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.157 OF 2011 September 12, 2011 SP