THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH CONTEMPT CASE NO.1505 of 2010 Dated: 10.12.2010 Between: KOKIKA LAKSHMIBAI & ANOTHER …PetitionerS And: PURUSHOTTAM REDDY & OTHERS …Respondents. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH CONEMPT CASE NO:1505 OF 2010 ORDER: - Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned G.P for Irrigation appearing on behalf of the respondents. This contempt case is filed by the petitioners seeking to punish the respondents for the wilful, wanton and deliberate violation of the orders passed in W.P.No:17502 of 2009, dated 9.10.2009. The petitioners have filed the writ petition in W.P.No:17502 of 2009 seeking for issuance of writ of mandamus to declarethe action of respondents-2 to 4 in not paying the rents and not providing any suitable job to any one of the family members of the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary and voilative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and to direct the respondents to pay the arrears of rents from 1.1.1981 to till date and to direct the respondents to provide any suitable job to the 2nd petitioner. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner reported that the petitioner died during the pendency of this writ petition. The case of the petitioners is that they inherited the land to an extent of Ac.6.15 cents in S.No;25/A in Jurala village and the 2nd petitioner is an unemployee possessing S.S.C qualification. The respondents conducted a survey of their village in the year 1980 to provide water facility for camp colony and they found that the well belonging to the petitioners which was already in existence was suitable for drinking water. There is no other Well for drinking water other than the said Well. The Officers promised the petitioners to provide job for one of the family members and also pay Rs.2,000/- p.m. towards rent provided that they allow to use the said Well water for drinking purpose for camp colony. Accordingly, the petitioners accepted for the said proposal. But, the respondents have not paid any amount to the petitioners nor provided a job to one of their family members inspite of their representation dated 10.8.2008. After several representations, the 2nd respondent issued a memo No:SED/PJP/DB/D2/GB/524/09.218/1/ dated 2.3.2009 directing the 3rd respondent to take necessary action. The 3rd respondent in turn endorsed the same on 17.3.2009 and directed the 4th respondent to file a detailed report. But, no action has been taken so far. Hence, the petitioners have filed the writ petition. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court by order dated 9.10.2009 disposed of the writ petition as under: “In view of the letter of the Superintending Engineer, P.J.P. Circle I, Gadwal, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.” The present contempt case is filed by the petitioners alleging that the respondents have wilfully and deliberately violated the orders of this Court. It is averred in the affidavit filed in support of the contempt case that aggrieved by the order passed by this Court, the respondents have not filed any writ appeal on the order passed by this Court and therefore, the same has become final and the respondents are bound to implement the order. But, they have not implemented the order of this Court and therefore, it amounts to violation of the order passed by this Court. On behalf of the respondents, a counter affidavit is filed denying the allegations made by the petitioners in the affidavit filed in support of the contempt case. It is inter alia stated in the counter that in pursuance of the orders of this Court in W.P.No:17502 of 2009, the respondents have verified the records and communicated to the concerned officials, who in turn found that these petitioners are in no way concerned with the land as per the office records and the respondents have also paid compensation to the land owner viz., Kummari Balamma in the year 1983. It is further stated that since the said Balamma has failed to produce any document, the respondents deposited the compensation amount in the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge, Gadwal under section 30 and 31 o the Land Acquisition Act and therefore, the petitioners are neither the owners nor the possessors of the land. It is also stated that the respondents have paid the compensation and installed the bore well for the purpose of public utility by paying the electricity bills regularly. It is further contended that as per the representation of the petitioners, they have got the property through Balamma in the year 1997 and therefore, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, the plea for providing job to one of the members and payment of rent of Rs.2,000/-, is rejected vide the letter No.EE/PJP/DDII/DB/D1/271, dated 15.11.2010 issued by the Executive Engineer and therefore, it amounts to compliance of the order of this Court. Under these circumstances coupled with the letter issued by the Executive Engineer, which was communicated to the petitioners and contentions raised in the counter, in my considered opinion, the respondents have complied with the order of this Court passed in W.P.No:17502 of 2009 and therefore, the question of contemptuous acts on the part of the respondents, does not arise. This contempt case is devoid of merits and the same is thereby liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this contempt case is dismissed. ___________________ G. CHANDRAIAH, J Date:10.12.2010 Gurc. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH CONTEMPT CASE NO:1505 OF 2010 DATED:10.12.2010