THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA C.C. No. 838 of 2011 O r d e r: Alleging that the respondent has willfully and deliberately violated the orders dated 08.10.2010 passed by this Court in W.P.M.P. No. 32807 of 2010 in W.P. No. 25691 of 2010, the petitioners filed this contempt case praying the Court to punish the respondent for contempt. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent received the above interim order dated 08.10.2010 of this Court, which restrained him from making payment of compensation cheques with respect to the subject-lands to respondent Nos. 4 to 6, on 20.10.2010. The respondent In spite of having knowledge of the said order, in gross violation thereof, has disbursed the compensation cheques to respondent No. 4 to 6 on 28.10.2010. Since the respondent has violated the above interim order of this Court, the learned counsel contends that the respondent should be punished for contempt. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent. The petitioners contend that the respondent having received the interim order of this Court on 20.10.2010, in gross violation thereof, disbursed the compensation cheques to respondent Nos. 4 and 6, and therefore, he is liable to be punished for contempt. However, the respondent denied this contention of the petitioners. He also denied that he received wire orders. And it is the specific case of the respondent, as is evident from the counter filed by him, he received the interim order of this Court on 29.10.2010, and not on 20.10.2010, as alleged by the petitioners. He came to know about the said order when the petitioners produced copy of acknowledgment dated 18.10.2010, while he was conducting enquiry proceedings. Upon close scrutiny of the acknowledge-ment dated 18.10.2010, he found that it contained the signature of one Smt. K. Suneetha Elizabeth, Senior Assistant, and was received by her. As the order of this court was not found in the file, and as the said Senior Assistant did not bring the same to his notice, he issued show cause notice dated 06.05.2011 calling upon her to submit her explanation, and after considering her explanation, it was found that one Sri. E. Srinivas, Attender, was responsible. Therefore, he issued notice to him, and in reply to the said notice, the said Attender submitted his reply stating that he received the court notice from the Senior Assistant, but kept it in the files, and on remembering, when he searched the file, he could not trace it, and therefore, out of fear, he did not bring the same to his notice. It is further contended that no further action could be initiated against the said Attender because he is an outsourcee employee, and has resigned from service on 31.03.2011. From this stand taken by the respondent, as noted above, it is clear that he came to know about the order of this court on 29.10.2011, by which time, he had already disbursed the compensation cheques to respondent Nos. 4 to 6 on 28.10.2011. As the order of this Court was brought to the notice of the respondent only on 29.10.2011 i.e. after disbursal of the amount on 28.10.2011, the respondent by his act of disbursing the cheques to respondent Nos. 4 to 6, cannot be alleged to have violated the orders of the Court. Be that as it may, though the respondent disbursed the compensation cheques to respondent Nos. 4 to 6, it is the case of the respondent that the entitlement of the petitioners towards compensation works out to Rs.47,13,550/-. That even though they paid compensation cheques to the tune of Rs.87,54,060/- to respondent Nos. 4 to 6, on coming to know about the order of this Court, they have sent intimation to the banks where respondent Nos. 4 to 6 had deposited, to freeze the said amounts, and acting on their intimation, the bank authorities have freezed the accounts of respondent Nos. 4 to 6 to the tune of Rs. 52.00 lakhs. As an amount of Rs.52.00 lakhs deposited by respondent Nos. 4 to 6 is freezed, which would be sufficient to meet the quantum of amount payable to the petitioners in the event they succeed in the writ petition, the interests of the petitioners stand protected, and considering the fact that the main writ petition is pending, I am of the considered opinion, there is no need to proceed further in the matter. Hence, the contempt case is closed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to agitate their claim for compensation in respect of the subject-lands in the main writ petition. No costs. _________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Dated: August, 2011 KSR