IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Contempt Case No.1282 of 2010 Between: P. Krishnaiah, S/o.Laxmaiah, aged about 65 years, R/o.Chinna Dagada village, Weepanagandla Mandal, Mahabubnagar District … Petitioner And Sri Lal Singh, Special Collector (LA), Srisailam Project (Bheema Project), Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar District, and another … Respondents Order: This contempt case, under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, is filed alleging that the respondents have disobeyed order dated 09-02-2010 passed by this court in W.P.No.1760 of 2010. In the aforesaid writ petition, it was the case of the writ petitioners that their houses situated at Chinna Dagada village, Weepanagandla Mandal, Mahabubnagar District, were acquired for the purpose of excavation of Priyadarshini Jurala Project Left Main Canal and notification was issued under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 which was published in the Gazette on 09-03-2002 and award was passed on 24-09- 2003. It was the case of the petitioners that one of the matters covered by the same notification was referred under Section 18 of the Act to the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy. Their grievance was that although they made applications under Section 28-A of the Act on 07-03-2009 within the time prescribed, in spite of the same, their applications were not considered. This Court, by order dated 09-02-2010, while disposing of the writ petition, directed the respondents to consider the applications of the petitioners therein in the light of the order dated 29-12-2008 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy in O.P.No.107 of 2008 and batch. When the matter is taken up, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents produced a copy of the order dated .09.2010 vide proceedings No.E/299/01-2 wherein the applications/petitions filed by the writ petitioners for re- determination of the market value under Section 28-A of the Act are rejected. In the aforesaid order, it is stated that though, originally, houses and structures were acquired, subsequently it was found that the houses of the petitioners were deleted from the notification and the petitioners were paid ex gratia vide proceedings 10-01-2003. It is further stated that on the said ground, the applications/petitions of the petitioners were rejected. In view of the reasoned order/endorsement issued by Special Deputy Collectors Office (LA) Unit, Priyadarshini Jurala Project, it cannot be said that the respondents have not complied the order of this court. The contempt case is accordingly dismissed. However, if the petitioner herein is aggrieved of the endorsement referred above, he may pursue any remedy open under law. ___________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) October 28, 2010 MRR