C 1 IN THE? HIGH COURT OP EARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT GUEBARGA DATED THIS THE 28” DAY OP MARCH, 2011 PR ESE NT ?I? P HON’BLE MnJUSII(ZE MOHAN’ SHANTANAGOUDAR AND THE HUN’BLE• MR.JUt3TICE ARALI NAGARAS C.CCJIo.3023/20ii (ClviL) BETWEEN: 1. L Vardendra Rao, 5/0.Eupperao, Age 72 years, 0cc: Retired Govt. Servant, .R/ o. Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur. 2. P Gun intl Rao, 5/ oRupperao, Age 54 p; 0cc: Advocate, .R /0.Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur, .. Complainants (By Sri Veeresh El Path, Adv.) AND 1. Nr.Ambu Kumar, The District Commissioner, RaicHur District, Raichur. 2. Shivshankar. Executive Engineer, .RW.D. Raichur, 3. Ujwal Kumar Ohosh, Assistant Commissioner. Lingasugur. .. Accused (By Sri M Kumar. HCGP.) This C.C.C is filed under Sections 11 & 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, praying to initiate contempt proceedings against the accused for having disobeyed the directions given in WP No.83701-702/2010 dated 19.10.2010 as at Annexure-B and punish them in accordance with law. This C.C.C. coming on for preliminary hearing this day, MOHAN SHANTANAGOUDAR J. passed the following: ORDER Counter affidavits are filed by respondents No.2 and 3. 2. This contempt petition is filed on the allegation that the respondents have violated the order of this Court dated 19.10.2010 in WP No.83708/2010 and connected matters. This Court while disposing of the said writ petition has ordered as under: “Having said so, the following order is passed: 1. All the petitioners shall take these proceedings as notice to them and shall file their documents before the competent authories to buttress their contention that they have title to the property and that they have not encroached any 3 part of the property belonging to the public authorities. The public authorities thereafter shall indicate as to under what pros ision they propose to proceed. 2. Needless to say that the public authorities shall not precipitate the matter until the claim of the petitioners is decided.” 3. According to the complainants, in spite of the aforementioned order and furnishing the documents by them before the competent authorities, their compound wall was demolished. The said fact is disputed by the learned Government Advocate by filing the counter affidavits. The Government Advocate further submits that the complainants have not furnished any document to show that the title over property is encroached any part of the public property. 3. The records alongwith the contempt petition reveal that the complainants have made representation as per AnnexureC dated 27.9.2010. There is nothing on record to show that they have approached the respondents after disposal of WP No.83708/2010 and connected matters i.e. after 19.10.2010. In view of the same, the interest of justice / 4 will be met if the complainants are given 10 days more time from this day to file documents of title, if any, alongwith representation. If the documents are produced as ordered, the respondents No.2 and 3 shall proceed as per the order dated 19.10.2010 passed in WP No.83708/2010 and connected matters. In view of the aforementioend observation, the contempt petition is disposed of. 3UDGE Sd/ 3UDGE 8km.