THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CONTEMPT CASE No. 205 of 2010. ORDER: (Per Goda Raghuram, J) This contempt case is filed alleging violation of the orders of this Court dt. 17.12.2009 in W.P.No. 15591 of 2008. It is alleged that this Court recorded an undertaking of the 20th respondent herein not to proceed with the construction or pursue progress of the oil and ginning industry without its civil works being approved by the Grampanchayat, Ganapavaram. However the said respondent proceeded with construction and operationalized the industry without permission from the Gram Panchayat. To support the allegation of violation of this Court’s order by the 20th respondent, petitioner relies on a communication dt. 22.12.2009 addressed by the District Panchayat Officer, Guntur District to the Tahsildar, Nadendla wherein it was stated that the operation of the industry is going on and that on enquiry, the Mill authorities have stated that all the operations were stopped in Survey Numbers mentioned in the writ petition as per the orders of the High Court and therefore the Tahsildar, Nadendla was requested to visit the premises of M/s Indupulapadu Cotton Mills, Ganapavaram Panchayat along with the Mandal Surveyor and verify whether the operations of the factory were stopped in the Survey Numbers mentioned in the writ petition and report compliance. This letter, except recording the observation of the District Panchayat Officer that operations are on, does not specify whether the operations were in the survey numbers mentioned in the writ petition and without approval from the Gram Panchayat. Since the District Panchayat Officer himself is not sure, he had called upon the Tahsildar, Nadendla by the said letter, to inspect the premises. This letter does not constitute an indictment of the conduct of the 20th respondent for violation of the orders of this Court. The 20th respondent filed a counter wherein it is clearly and categorically asserted that on 23.12.2009 the Tahsildar Nadendla along with surveyor inspected the site of the ginning and oil mill of the answering respondent and after inspection found no violation of the orders of this Court. The 20th respondent also categorically asserted that he is not proceeding with construction and other operations of the ginning and oil mill and that the petitioner is making false representations and allegations in the contempt case. The District Collector, Guntur filed a counter affidavit wherein the averments in the counter of the 20th respondent are corroborated. The District Collector states that the letter addressed by the District Panchayat Officer to the Tahsildar, Nadendla is based on the observations by a non-technical officer who is not familiar with the site in question. It is further stated that on 23.12.2009, the Tahsildar, Nadendla along with the surveyor visited the site and measured the survey numbers in question and submitted a report with regard to the status of each survey number and also drafted a sketch of the site and during the inspection it was noticed that no operation or construction is going on in the survey numbers mentioned in the writ petition. However, in the old construction pertaining to the old Indupulapadu Cotton Mill, the company had encroached Ac. 0.08 cents into the survey number 203/B1 for which the Grampanchayat may exercise one of the options; either to regularize the encroachment or to recover the same. The District Collector clearly and categorically stated that the encroachment is not for construction in respect of Indupulapadu Oil and Ginning Mill and there is no violation of the orders of this Court. Proceedings in contempt are quasi criminal in nature. Unless there is proof beyond reasonable doubt that the order of this Court was violated, no action is warranted. The report of the District Collector, a responsible Government Official whose neutrality is not impeached, on the basis of the reports of the revenue officials who inspected the premises, asserts clearly and categorically that the 20th respondent has not violated the orders of this Court. Further, since the averments in the counters of the 20th respondent and the District Collector, Guntur are not refuted by the petitioner by filing reply affidavits, we see no reasons to proceed further in the contempt case. The contempt case is accordingly dismissed. The Rule is discharged. _________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J _________________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 15.07.2011. KRB. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CONTEMPT CASE No. 205 of 2010. ORDER: (Per Goda Raghuram, J) Dt. 15.07.2011.