THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI CONTEMPT CASE No.1232 of 2010 Date: 30.03.2011 Between : S. Narayana Reddy … Petitioner and Rhoini Kumari, Forest Range Officer, Udayagiri, SPSR Nellore District and another. … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI CONTEMPT CASE No.1232 of 2010 ORDER : This contempt case has been filed complaining disobedience of the order dated 10.6.2009 passed by this Court in W.P.No.13863 of 2004. 2. The petitioner filed the above writ petition challenging the interference of the Forest Range Officer, Udayagiri, Nellore District, in the mining operations and transportation of mineral over the land in Sy.No.251 of Gungulavari Cheruvupalli village, Udayagiri Mandal, Nellore District, on the ground that the said land is situated in Reserve Forest area. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court by order dated 10.6.2009 disposed of the writ petition directing the 2nd respondent-Director of Mines and Geology, Hyderabad, to conduct a joint survey in the presence of Revenue and Forest officials and take appropriate decision as per law after putting the petitioner on notice. It was further directed that till such time, the Forest officials should not interfere with the operations being conducted by the petitioner. Complaining disobedience of the said orders, the present contempt case has been filed. 3. From a perusal of the material placed before this Court, it could be seen that pursuant to the orders of this Court, a joint survey was conducted on 30.9.2009 in the presence of the petitioner and a report was prepared, to which the petitioner was a signatory. The said report discloses that the land in Sy.No.251 does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Forest Department. Whatever is the result of the joint survey, since the survey had been conducted as per the directions of this Court, it cannot be said that the respondents have disobeyed the orders of this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that inspite of the fact that the survey report reveals that the subject land falls outside the jurisdiction of the forest area, the respondents are still interfering with the mining operations being conducted by the petitioner. If that be so, the same cannot be taken note of in this contempt proceedings. The petitioner is at liberty to workout his remedy by instituting appropriate proceedings. 5. Accordingly, the contempt case is dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI 30.03.2011. Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI CONTEMPT CASE No.1232 of 2010 30.03.2011 (Msr)