THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU DATED: 27-07-2010 CONTEMPT APPEAL No. 6 OF 2009 Between: C. Venkatrami Reddy ..... APPELLANT AND Chintam Manohar Reddy and two others .....RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CONTEMPT APPEAL No. 6 OF 2009 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) This appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’) by the appellant who is the 2nd respondent in C.C No. 82 of 2009 is directed against the order of the learned single Judge in the said CC insofar as sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of fifteen days and with fine of Rs.2,000/- under Section 12 (1) of the Act. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein filed Writ Petition No. 28225 of 2008 for issuance of a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the District Panchayat Officer, Kadapa – respondent No.1 therein and the appellant herein in constructing the office building of Vandadi Gram Panchayat in Survey No. 87 of Vandadi Revenue Village in Chinnamandem Mandal of Kadapa District near Kadirivandlapalle Village though the same is more than 4 to 5 KMs away for 90% of the population of other 11 villages of Vandadi Gram Panchayat without following any procedure as illegal, unjust, arbitrary, highhanded, malafide and against public convenience and to consequently direct them not to construct the office building of Vandadi Gram Panchayat in Survey No.87 of Vandadi Revenue Village in Chinnamandem Mandal. This Court by order dated 31-12-2008 granted interim stay as sought for by the respondents – writ petitioners viz., directing the District Panchayat Officer, Kadapa and the appellant herein not to proceed with the further construction of the office building of Vandadi Gram Panchayat, pending disposal of the writ petition. Alleging violation of the said interim order, the writ petitioners filed the said contempt case. The District Panchayat Officer and the appellant filed separate counter affidavits. The appellant filed the counter affidavit sworn on 31-05-2009 stating that the Gram Panchayat in pursuance of the resolution dated 15-10-2008 started construction work immediately and that he had no knowledge about the passing of the interim orders by this Court till legal notice dated 13-01-2009 was issued on behalf of the writ petitioners falsely alleging that he was proceeding with the construction of the building in spite of passing of interim orders by this Court on 31-12-2008 and that he did not receive any notice prior to legal notice dated 13-01-2009. It is further stated that in pursuance of the interim order passed by this Court, a report was called for in the matter by the Divisional Panchayat Officer, Kadapa after issuing notice to the ten ward members along with the appellant herein fixing the date for conduct of enquiry as 05-02-2009 and on the said date, eight ward members, the appellant herein, the MPTC concerned and many villagers attended the enquiry. The enquiry report clearly reveals that as on 05-02-2009, the building was constructed completely and is ready for occupation by the Gram Panchayat. The appellant also gave a detailed reply on 21-01-2009 to the legal notice dated 13-01-2009 specifically denying the allegations. In the reply notice dated 13-01-2009, the appellant has categorically stated that right from that date he will not proceed with the further construction which fact clearly discloses that till 21-01-2009 he proceeded with the construction. Therefore, the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant stopped the construction on 18-01-2009 cannot be accepted. The learned single Judge after taking into consideration the reply filed by the appellant found that he willfully disobeyed the order passed by this Court which is evident from the report of the Divisional Panchayat Officer dated 05- 02-2009, wherein it was observed that the building was already completed on 05-02-2009. Therefore, the learned single Judge by a reasoned order found that the appellant herein willfully violated the order passed by this Court making himself liable to be punished under Section 12 (1) of the Act and accordingly sentenced him as aforementioned. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the District Panchayat Officer filed Contempt Appeal No. 5 of 2009 and the same was allowed by this Court by judgment dated 26-08-2009 setting aside the sentence imposed on him. Therefore, the appellant is also entitled to the same benefit and in fact, both the appeals ought to have been heard and decided together as they arise out of the same order. This Court while allowing the appeal filed by the District Panchayat Officer observed that there is no deliberate and willful disobedience of the interim order of this Court as far as the District Panchayat Officer is concerned, more particularly when he responded to the notice issued by the counsel for the writ petitioners by way of telegram to the appellant to comply with the orders of this Court. The appellant cannot take advantage of the said observation for the simple reason that he admittedly received notice dated 13-01-2009 on 17-01- 2009 and till 21-01-2009 the date on which reply notice was issued, he proceeded with the construction and he has not produced any evidence about stopping of construction. Thus, he proceeded with the construction in defiance to the order passed by this Court. In view of the same, the finding recorded by the learned single Judge that the appellant had willfully disobeyed the order passed by this Court and is liable to be punished does not suffer from any illegality. However taking a lenient view, we modify the sentence imposed on the appellant and confine it to the fine amount of Rs.2000/- . The contempt appeal is accordingly disposed of. A. GOPAL REDDY, J K.C. BHANU, J 27-07-2010 ks