HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Contempt Case No.1523 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 10364 of 2006 stating that a portion of land owned by her was affected in the widening of the road and the respondents have neither paid the compensation nor provided any alternative land. The writ petition was disposed of on 25.5.2006 directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the feasibility of allotting compensatory land to the petitioner, if it is otherwise available, to the extent the property was affected in the widening of the road. This contempt case is filed alleging that the respondents 1 and 2 have not taken steps so far. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have filed separate counter affidavits. According to them, no portion of the land owned by the petitioner was affected in the widening of the road. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. The writ petition was disposed of at the stage of admission. No specific finding was recorded to the effect that any portion of the land owned by the petitioner was affected in the widening of the road. The direction was issued with certain conditions. In their counter affidavits, the respondents have stated that not only the building owned by the petitioner, but also her compound wall are in tact. In that view of the matter, the question of respondents providing any alternative land to the petitioner does not arise. The contempt case is accordingly closed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY,J DATE: 29th December, 2010 pnb