THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.1046 of 2010 Date:08.08.2011 Between: H.J.S. Flat Holders Association, Rep by its convenor Mr.Syed Mahaboob, S/o.Syed Akber, Aged about 71 years, R/o.H.J.S.I.T.C., Ponnuru Road, Guntur, Guntur District. ………...Petitioner. And The Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board, Hyderabad rep by its Chief Executive Officer, Gaffar Sahed and others. …… Respondents. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.1046 of 2010 ORDER: 1 . This contempt case has been filed complaining disobedience of the order dated 03.08.2009 passed in WPMP No.18775 of 2009 in W.P.No.14319 of 2009. 2. Notice before admission came to be ordered 30- 07.2010. 3. The 1st respondent filed counter affidavit. It is stated in the counter affidavit that out of 153 persons, 53 persons have failed to turn up to obtain registered sale deeds. Para Nos.8 & 9 of the counter affidavit needs to be noted and they are thus: “I submit that in an earlier writ petition the names of the eligible persons seeking registration of plots were about 153 in number but by the time the 1st respondent intended to register the plots in their names as per the direction of the Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.4196 of 1989 dated 13.3.1992 about 53 persons did not turn up. Each purchaser is an independent entity and will have to seek his remedy individually but the writ petitioner has not filed the list of 53 persons and is not authorized to file the present writ petition. I submit that the main relief in the writ petition as well as interim relief is one and the same. By the by, the Hon'ble Court granted interim relief as prayed for under the impression to dispose of the representation dated 05/11/2008, pending disposal of the main writ petition. In compliance of the interim order in W.P.M.P.No.18775/2009 dated 03/08/2009 the 1st respondent addressed a letter to the counsel of the writ petitioner by name Sri. B. Parameshwar Rao and Associates stating that the 1st respondent deputed the then Secretary twice to find out the 53 purchasers in whose name the plots have to be registered but they did not turn up and further the matter had to be placed before the 1st respondent for taking appropriate action Vide F.No.1012/GNT/Prot/2006/Z- VII Dated 21/08/2010.” 4. When the contempt case came up for hearing, no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the 1st respondent issued a notice to the counsel appearing for the petitioner-association to furnish the names of 53 persons in whose favaour registered sale deeds are required to be executed but the petitioner- association has not furnished the list of the persons in whose favour the registered sale deeds are to be executed. 6. In that view of the matter, the Contempt Case is devoid of merits and accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed. No costs. ________________________________ JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY Date:08.08.2011 mrb