The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Contempt Case No.1038 of 2011 Date: 29.10.2011 Between: M.Venkat Reddy ..... Petitioner AND Smt.B.Vasanti and 2 others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.Ch.Ramesh Babu Counsel for the respondents: Mr.P.Raghavender Reddy, SC for ZPPS/MPPS The Court made the following: Order: This Contempt Case is filed alleging wilful disobedience of Order, dated 08-02-2011, in WP.No.29220 of 2010, by the respondents. The petitioner filed the aforesaid Writ Petition for a Mandamus to declare the action of the Shamshabad Gram Panchayat in interfering with and restraining the petitioner from proceeding with the construction of building as per the approved plan, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner has impleaded the Shamshabad Gram Panchayat represented by its Secretary, who is respondent No.1 herein, in the said Writ Petition. This Court, by Order, dated 08-02-2011, allowed the said Writ Petition by holding that, so long as the construction undertaken by the petitioner is in accordance with the sanctioned plan, no one can interfere with his possession. While dealing with the plea of the learned Standing Counsel that, on 20-11-2010, the District Panchayat Officer (for short ‘the DPO’)) has issued a memo, directing the Shamshabad Gram Panchayat, to stop further construction by the petitioner in view of a complaint made by the villagers, this Court observed that it is not the pleaded case of the respondent in the Writ Petition that the said memo was served on the petitioner. Liberty was, however, given to the DPO to initiate appropriate action strictly in accordance with law, if he has material to be satisfied that the construction undertaken by the petitioner is illegal. Accordingly, a direction was given to the respondent- Shamshabad Gram Panchayat not to interfere with the petitioner’s construction activity so long as the same is strictly in accordance with the sanctioned plan. Alleging that the respondent was interfering with the petitioner’s construction despite the aforesaid direction given in the Writ Petition, the petitioner filed contempt Case No.311 of 2011 against respondent No.1 herein. In the said Contempt Case, respondent No.1 herein filed a counter-affidavit wherein she denied the allegation of her interference. She further pleaded that her enquiries revealed that on 28-02-2011, the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat issued an order directing the Gram Panchayat Staff to take action to stop construction by the petitioner and that she was never involved in demolition of the structures on 28-02-2011 or 01-03-2011. After perusal of the record produced by the learned Standing Counsel, this Court has dismissed the said Contempt Case with the finding that the Gram Panchayat staff has interfered with the petitioner’s construction and removed the structures on the direction issued by the Sarpanch, but there was no material to show that respondent No.1 has given direction. The petitioner filed the present Contempt Case with the allegation that respondent No.1 has issued notice, to the petitioner to stop construction, on 28- 02-2011. In support of his allegation, the petitioner has filed a photograph of the purported notice, dated 28-02-2011, affixed to his premises. He has also filed a CD containing a series of photos in order to substantiate his plea that the notice issued by respondent No.1 is dated 28-02-2011 and not 08-02-2011. A detailed counter-affidavit is filed by respondent No.1 wherein she has denied issuance of any notice on 28-02-2011. She has stated that before the order in WP.No.29220 of 2010 was communicated to her, she has issued the notice on 08-02- 2011 and that on coming to know about the order of this Court, passed in WP.No.29220 of 2010, she has not caused any further interference. At the hearing, Sri Ramesh Babu, learned Counsel for the petitioner, emphatically, submitted that respondent No.1 has been changing her versions. Having issued the notice on 28- 02-2011, she has retracted in order to avoid Contempt and that the notice issued by her was dated 28-02-2011 and not 08-02- 2011. The learned Standing Counsel for Shamshabad Gram Panchayat, representing respondent No.1, has placed before the Court the record, a perusal of which would show that respondent No.1 has issued notice on 08-02-2011. The record contains notice, dated 28-02-2011, issued by the Sarpanch. Even though the petitioner has pleaded that respondent No.1 has issued notice, dated 28-02-2011, and filed the photographs in support thereof, it is not possible for this Court to adjudicate on this disputed question of fact in this Contempt Case. In the absence of clear evidence to show that the impugned proceeding is dated 28-02-2011 and not 08-02-2011, respondent No.1 cannot be held guilty of deliberate violation of the order of this Court. As regards respondent No.2, who is the Sarpanch, admittedly respondent No.2 is not a party to the Writ Petition. Therefore, no action, for the alleged violation of Order, dated 08- 02-2011, in WP.No.29220 of 2010, can be taken against him. For the above-mentioned reasons, the Contempt Case is dismissed. _______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 29th October, 2011 LUR