THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Contempt Case No.1074 of 2011 Dated 18th November, 2011 Between: N.A.V.Krishnaram …Petitioner And S.Venkatramana …Respondent Counsel for the petitioner: Sri T.V.S.Prabhakar Rao Counsel for respondent: Sri G.Elisha The Court made the following: ORDER: This contempt case is filed alleging wilful disobedience of order, dated 08.02.2011, in W.P.No.30605 of 2010. The petitioner herein filed the above-mentioned writ petition for a mandamus to declare the action of the Gram Panchayat Kattamuru Village, Peddapuram Mandal, East Godavari District in not taking steps for removal of obstruction for free flow of water from major drain passing from Sri Bikkina Venkat Rao’s house to Aakasasthambham Street, Ramalayam, Kattamuru Village, Peddapuram Mandal, East Godavari District. This Court disposed of the said writ petition by directing the Gram Panchayat to take all such measures as are required for clearing blockage in the drainage by following the procedure contemplated under Section 131(2) of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Alleging that the said order is violated, the writ petitioner filed the present contempt case. The respondent, who is the Panchayat Secretary of the Gram Panchayat, filed a counter affidavit, wherein it is inter alia stated that immediately after receipt of the order passed in the writ petition, he has issued notice on 09.03.2011 to one N.K.S.Prasad, who has closed the drain, with a request to him to remove the obstruction, that as there was no reply from him, the respondent has given a complaint to the Station House Officer, Peddapuram on 17.03.2011 for police protection, and that as there was no action from the police, the respondent has once again given a requisition on 07.04.2011 requesting the police to take immediate action. It is further stated that in pursuance of the said requisition, the Inspector of Police directed the respondent to request the DSP, Peddapuram for action and the respondent has accordingly made a complaint to the DSP on 13.04.2011, that the DSP in turn directed the respondent to approach the Superintendent of Police and accordingly, the respondent has given complaint to the SP on 15.04.2011. That as the respondent was unable to get police aid, he has addressed another letter, dated 07.06.2011, to the police and other officials fixing the date for executing the order of this Court as 09.06.2011 with a request to the police to make arrangements for bandobust and that on 09.06.2011, the SI and CI of Police were present at the disputed site and that the respondent has arranged a poclainer for removal of obstruction and that at that time Sri N.K.S.Prasad has restrained all the officials and workers by keeping a car as obstruction in the middle of the road to prevent poclainer from entering the disputed site. It is further stated that as the women folk prevented the officials from entering the site, the police officials left the place and therefore the work could not be executed. In the contempt case, this Court has passed an order on 14.10.2011 permitting the respondent to file a report before the Station House Officer for taking appropriate action against Sri N.K.S.Prasad or anybody claiming through him to enable the respondent to implement the order of the Court. At the hearing, Sri G.Elisha, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent, submitted that a report was accordingly filed before the Police on 15.10.2011 and that in spite of the same, no action thereon has been taken by the police. The above-noted facts would reveal that the respondent has left no stone unturned to get the order of this Court implemented, but obviously due to non-cooperation by the police, he could not implement the order of this Court. In the light of these facts, I am convinced that the respondent has not indulged in wilful violation of the order of this Court. The non-compliance with the order of this Court appears to be beyond the control of the respondent. As police have not been impleaded in this case, the petitioner is left free to seek appropriate directions to the police for due implementation of order, dated 08.02.2011, in W.P.No.30605 of 2010. Subject to the liberty given as above, the contempt case is dismissed and the respondent is discharged from the contempt proceedings. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 18th November, 2011 VGB