THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.198 of 2011 ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 alleging that respondents 1 to 9 have willfully violated the directions issued by this Court in order, dated 24.12.2010 in WPMP.No.40390 of 2010 in Writ Petition No.31770 of 2010. Respondents 1 to 9 herein are the petitioners in Writ Petition No.31770 of 2010, which is filed questioning communication, dated 28.07.2010, sent by the Tahsildar to the Station House Officer, Buttayagudem in Roc.No.350/2010(A). The said proceedings were issued on the complaint of the petitioner herein about the trespass by respondents 1 to 9 with regard to land admeasuring Acs.14.04 cents covered by R.S.No.666/2 situated at Buttayagudem Village. By interim order, dated 24.12.2010 in WPMP.No.40390 of 2010 in Writ Petition No.31770 of 2010, this Court directed the respondents therein to maintain status quo with regard to possession of the land in question, while suspending proceedings, dated 28.07.2010. In this case, it is the case of the petitioner that though she is in possession of the land in question, on 30.04.2011, in violation of the directions issued by this Court, respondents herein have cut and carried away the crop raised by her. Though it is the allegation of the petitioner that there was a trespass by the respondents on 30.04.2011, in the counter-affidavit, respondents denied the possession of the petitioner and pleaded that they are in possession of the property covered by R.S.No.666/2 of Buttayagudem Village. From the averments mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition as well as in the counter-affidavit filed by respondents 1 to 9, it appears, there is a serious dispute with regard to possession of the land in question. Merely because it is stated that the petitioner lodged a complaint before the police with regard to the land in question that by itself cannot be taken as the basis for her allegation that she is in possession of the land in question and the respondents have committed violation of the orders of this Court by trespassing into the land in question on 30.04.2011. In the absence of any clear material to show that the petitioner is in possession of the land in question and there was a trespass by the respondents on 30.04.2011, it is not possible to accept the plea of the petitioner that the respondents have violated the directions of this Court attracting the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. For the aforesaid reasons, the Contempt Case is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 29th JUNE, 2011. kvni