THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.1787 of 2010 Date:07.02.2011 Between: Vemanamanda Venkata Ramanamma and another ..... Petitioners AND The District Collector, Visakhapatnam and another .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri P. Krishna Prakash Counsel for Respondents: Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue The Court made the following: ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 03.11.2010 in W.P.M.P.No.28637 of 2010 in W.P.No.22470 of 2010. I have heard Sri P. Krishna Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and also perused the record. The petitioners filed W.P.No.22470 of 2010 for a mandamus to direct the respondents to handover an extent of Ac.1.00 to them in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.1543 dated 24.12.2008 and memo dated 24.07.2010. In W.P.M.P.No.28637 of 2010 filed by the petitioners, this Court granted the following in interim order: “In view of G.O.Ms.No.1543, dated 24.12.2008 and Memo in Rc.No.1502/2002 E2 dated 24.07.2010 of respondent No.1, respondent No.2 is directed to consider the petitioners’ application for handing over of possession of the lands admeasuring Ac.1.00 i.e. Sy.No.129/1 and 3 to an extent of Ac.0.78 cents of Vadlapudi village and in Sy.No.131/1 to an extent of Ac.0.22 cents of Chinagantyada village, Gajuvaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District and communicate the proceedings in this regard to the petitioners within a period of four weeks from today” Alleging that this order has not been complied, the petitioners filed the present contempt case. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.2, it is inter alia stated that in pursuance of the above interim order passed by this Court, he has inspected the land along with Mandal Surveyor and Village Revenue Officer and that notice was issued to the petitioners in the month of October, 2010 for handing over of the land to him, but the same was returned by the postal department and that according to the sub-division records of Vadlapudi a n d Chinagantyada villages, the Government lands were sub-divided in favour of the husband of petitioner No.1 for alienation but inspection revealed that the land is not tallying on ground with sub-division records and that the same is not vacant. That the respondents are ready and willing to handover the land admeasuring Ac.0.79 cents instead of Ac.1.00, which fact was intimated through registered post on 08.01.2011. Respondent No.2 has tendered unconditional apology. The learned counsel for the petitioners made several submissions on the merits of the pleas raised by respondent No.2 in the counter-affidavit regarding non-availability of Ac.0.21 cents. These submissions, in my opinion, fall beyond the scope of the contempt case because this Court has merely directed the respondents to consider the petitioners’ representation for handing over of the land. The scope of the contempt case is, therefore, limited to the alleged non-consideration of the petitioners’ representation as per the direction of this Court. Undoubtedly, there is some delay in respondent No.2 sending his response to the petitioners’ representation. However, in the light of the facts pleaded by him in his counter-affidavit, it is not a case where serious view needs to be taken on this delay. As respondent No.2 offered to handover Ac.0.79 cents, the petitioners may take possession of the same without prejudice to their right to avail their remedies for claiming balance Ac.0.21 cents. Subject to the above observations, the Contempt Case is dismissed. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 07th February, 2011 GHN