HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI CONTEMPT CASE No.332 of 2011 in W.P.M.P. No.38224 of 2010 in WRIT PETITION No.30007 of 2010 Date: November 21, 2011 Between: 1. B. Somamma & 5 others … Petitioners and 1. Sri N. Gulzar, I.A.S., District Collector, Hyderabad District, Nampally, Hyderabad & 2 others. … Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI CONTEMPT CASE No.332 of 2011 in W.P.M.P. No.38224 of 2010 in WRIT PETITION No.30007 of 2010 O R D E R: The petitioners filed the writ petition seeking regularization of occupation of their house sites situated at Jawahar Nagar, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad, in terms of the orders of the State Government issued under G.O.Ms.No.166, Revenue (Assn.POT) Department, dated 16.02.2008. This Court, while entertaining the said writ petition, granted interim order on 01.12.2010 directing the respondents not to demolish the houses constructed in the subject land. The petitioners filed this contempt case alleging that respondents 1 and 2 demolished their houses on 12.3.2011 by disregarding the orders of this court. 2. While entertaining the contempt case, this Court issued Form-I notice by orders dated 11.7.2011. In response thereto, respondent No.1, the District Collector, Hyderabad District, has filed his counter-affidavit. The counter-affidavit states that the land, which was in occupation of the petitioners, is Government land allotted to the Labour Department. It also states that the applications of the petitioners were considered by the District Level Committee and rejected the same on the ground that the house numbers are not in existence. It further states that the petitioners were not in possession of the subject land. I have considered the matter and perused the material. A letter dated 29.9.2011 which is crucial in this matter was addressed on behalf of the Collector to the Superintendent Engineer, Rajiv Vidya Mission in which it was stated that the pucca houses constructed on the subject land are removed by demolishing on 25.9.2010. It may be noticed that this Court passed orders on 01.12.2010. Therefore the houses appear to have been demolished even before the orders of this Court. The petitioners do not dispute this fact by filing any rejoinder. 3. The said material, prima facie shows that the structures were not in existence at least by the date of interim order of this Court dated 01.12.2010. It is well settled that unless a clear case is made out, this Court cannot entertain a contempt case. 4. In the circumstances as above, I am not inclined to proceed with the contempt case and the same is accordingly dismissed. __________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J Date: November 21, 2011. BSB