THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI Contempt Case No. 1824 of 2010 Date: 18.04.2011 Between: R.Varshini, Hyderabad. …Petitioners And N.Nbarayana, Hyderabad and another. …Respondent THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI Contempt Case No. 1824 of 2010 O R D E R : This contempt case is filed with a prayer to punish the respondents herein for allegedly violating the orders passed by this Court dated 12.08.2010 in W.P.M.P.No.25354 of 2010 in W.P.No.20007 of 2010. The petitioner herein is the respondent No.3 in W.P.No.20007 of 2010. The respondents herein filed the said writ petition seeking a declaration that the action of the Assistant Commissioner Circle-9, GHMC (respondent No.2 in the writ petition) in demolishing a portion of the premises bearing No. 1-7-495/15, Harinagar, Zamistanpur, Mushirabad at the instance of the respondent No.3 (petitioner herein) as arbitrary and illegal. Pending the writ petition, they filed W.P.M.P.No. 25354 of 2010 seeking a direction to the respondent 1 and 2 therein not to interfere with the renovation work in the premises in question. This Court, while directing notice to the respondents, by order dated 12.08.2010 passed the following order: “Notice. Post after two weeks. Respondents are directed not to demolish the structures in question. There shall also be a direction that the petitioner shall not proceed with any further constructions until further orders.” The present contempt case is filed alleging that the respondents herein (writ petitioners) had been proceeding with the construction contrary to the directions of this Court dated 12.08.2010. In the counter affidavit field by the respondents the allegation has been denied. I have heard the learned counsel for the both the parties. As could be seen from the material available on record the respondents herein/ writ petitioners claimed to have purchased a portion of the premises No. 1-7-495/15 admeasuring 81 square yards from one R.Govardhan under a registered sale deed. A small portion out of the said premises was stated to have been gifted by R.Govardhan to his daughter. It appears that there are disputes among the family members of the vendor of the writ petitioners and O.S.No.1616 of 2010 filed by the petitioner herein for partition is pending on the file of the Court of the V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The writ petitioners had earlier filed W.P.No.18770 of 2010 alleging that the Police were interfering with civil disputes. W.P.No.20007 of 2010 came to be filed challenging the notice dated 07.08.2010 issued by the GHMC proposing to pull down the premises in possession of the writ petitioners. It is true that this Court while granting interim stay of demolition directed the writ petitioners not to proceed with any further constructions. However, it is the specific case of the writ petitioners/respondents herein that no construction as such is being made, but they were only carrying on certain renovation work. Such a disputed question of fact cannot be enquired into and decided by this Court on mere affidavits. The GHMC is not made a party to this contempt case. At any rate, since the writ petition is still pending, it is always open to the petitioner to seek appropriate directions for redressal of his grievance in any, in which event, after hearing the GHMC the appropriate orders can be passed. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to entertain this contempt case and the same is accordingly dismissed. _______________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 18.04.2011 KLP