IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.1307 of 2010 Between: P. Venkateswarlu ..... Petitioner AND Mrs. Sunira Vassi .....Respondent Counsel for the petitioner : Sri K. Siva Reddy Counsel for the respondent : Sri P. Bhaskar The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.1307 of 2010 ORDER: This contempt case is filed alleging willful disobedience of order dated 24.04.2010 in WPMP.No.10803 of 2010 in Writ Petition No.8391 of 2010. After several adjournments, it has now come out that most of the documents, which have been sought for by the petitioner, have been supplied. The only document, which is the subject matter of dispute in this contempt case, pertains to letter No.E(REP)I 53 of 1991 of the railway board. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, this document is not part of those documents, which were supplied to the petitioner. Sri Bhaskar, learned Standing counsel for Railways, stated that this document was destroyed long back and that therefore the same cannot be supplied. Having regard to the generic nature of the order passed by this Court with reference to which the petitioner has filed the contempt case, it is not possible for this Court to hold that non-supply of a particular document on account of purported destruction cannot be viewed as violation of the orders of this Court by the respondent. In this view of the matter, the contempt case is dismissed, however, with liberty to the petitioner to pursue his writ petition on merits. In view of the apprehension expressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as the documents supplied to his client are not certified, his client may not be in a position to make use of the same in appropriate proceedings. It is made clear that the documents, which have been supplied by the respondent, pending the contempt case, can be used by the petitioner in any legal proceedings despite the fact that they are not formally certified by the respondent. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 22.11.2010 ES