HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE G. ROHINI CONTEMPT CASE No.1832 of 2010 in W.P.M.P. No.11709 of 2009 in WRIT PETITION No.8952 of 2009 Date: November 01, 2011 Between: A. Siva Lakshmi Devi … Petitioner And Malakondaiah, The Director, DMRL, Hyderabad. … Respondent * * * HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE G. ROHINI CONTEMPT CASE No.1832 of 2010 in W.P.M.P. No.11709 of 2009 in WRIT PETITION No.8952 of 2009 O R D E R: This contempt case is filed with a prayer to punish the respondent for allegedly flouting the order dated 28th April 2009 passed in W.P.M.P. No.11709 of 2009 in W.P. No.8952 of 2009. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. W.P. No.8952 of 2009 was filed with a prayer to declare the action of the respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the lands in plot Nos.59 to 66, 76 to 81, 82 to 89 and 101 to 108 in Survey Nos.137, 140 and 141 of Badangipet village, Saroor Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, without following the due process of law as illegal and arbitrary. By order dated 28th April 2009 passed in W.P.M.P. No.11709 of 2009 in W.P. No.8952 of 2009, this Court directed the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the lands in question without following the due process of law. This contempt case is filed alleging that in spite of the interim order passed by this Court, the respondents had removed the fencing and started construction of a wall in the land in possession of the petitioner. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent it is explained that the possession of the land in question was taken long back on 02.4.2008 and the allegation that the petitioner has now been dispossessed is incorrect and without any basis. Such a disputed question of fact cannot be enquired into by this Court in the contempt proceeding. Moreover, the main writ petition is pending and the learned counsel for the respondent states that a detailed counter-affidavit has already been filed denying the allegations made by the petitioner. Hence, I do not find any justifiable reason to entertain the contempt petition at this stage. The contempt case is accordingly dismissed. ___________ G. ROHINI, J Date: November 01, 2011. BSB