THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI Contempt Case No. 1382 of 2010 Dated: 23.11.2010 Between: Bashir Shaik, Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER AND Dr.T.S.R. Anjaneyulu, The commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Nellore and 3 others. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI Contempt Case No. 1382 of 2010 ORDER: This contempt case is filed alleging violation of the order passed by this Court dated 13.07.2010 in W.P.No.8600 of 2010 which reads as under: “Accordingly, the petitioner herein is permitted to make a representation before the 1st respondent raising all the objections with regard to the construction on the alleged joint way as well as the building permission dated 06.05.2010 granted in favour of the respondents 2 and 3 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Thereafter, the 1st respondent shall enquire into the objections and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the respondents 2 and 3. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of the representation/objections from the writ petitioner. Till such time, the respondents 2 and 3 shall not proceed with any constructions on the alleged 16 feet road situated on the western side of the plot claimed by the petitioner.” It is alleged that in spite of the above order passed by this Court, respondents 2 and 3 had started constructions and that the 1st respondent failed to conduct the enquiry within six weeks as directed by this Court. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent stating that the enquiry was completed and by proceedings dated 23.10.2010 the permission accorded to the 2nd respondent was confirmed. It is explained that the delay in concluding the proceedings was only due to the reason that the petitioner did not make himself available for the enquiry in spite of prior notice. It is further stated that the proceedings dated 23.10.2010 was already communicated to the petitioner. The allegations against respondents 2 and 3 are also denied and it is explained that all the necessary steps were taken for removal of the construction material from the work spot of the 2nd respondent during the pendency of the enquiry. A copy of the order dated 23.10.2010 has also been placed before this Court. No reply affidavit has been filed by the petitioner disputing the stand taken in the counter affidavit. Having regard to the order dated 23.10.2010 passed by the 1st respondent, no further enquiry is necessary and the Contempt Case is accordingly closed leaving it open to the respondents to challenge the order dated 23.10.2010, if so advised, by working out the appropriate remedy available under law. No costs _____________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 23.11.2010 KLP