THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.1644 OF 2010 Dated:21.04.2011 Between: Boddu Ratnamba .. Petitioner And B.Purushotham Reddy and others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.1644 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.11390 of 2010 seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the District Town Planning Officer and the Secretary of Kothapet Gram Panchayat in not taking any action against respondent Nos.3 and 4 who are allegedly making construction deviating the sanctioned plan as illegal and for consequential direction. By an order dated 10.06.2010 this Court disposed of the writ petition observing that the allegation of encroachment by respondent Nos.3 and 4 is a matter to be resolved in a civil suit. This Court directed the second respondent to conduct an enquiry and if there is any deviation take action against respondent Nos.3 and 4. The petitioner alleges that after disposal of the writ petition, the second respondent issued a notice dated 23.06.2010 to the parties to attend the enquiry. An enquiry was conducted on 20.07.2010 by the second respondent, but in effect no further action has been taken though it was found that there were deviations by the fourth respondent. The second respondent has filed counter affidavit stating that after conducting enquiry, a report was sent to the District Panchayat Officer on 13.10.2010 and that necessary instructions are awaited before any action is taken against respondent Nos.3 and 4 for deviation of the sanctioned plan. The matter came up on 24.03.2011. The counsel for the petitioner sought time for filing reply affidavit. Even today the reply affidavit is not filed and further time is sought which is declined. There is no dispute that in obedience to the order of this Court, the second respondent conducted the enquiry. The averment made by the second respondent that a report has been sent to the District Panchayat Officer for necessary instructions is also not in serious dispute. Indeed, Rule 33(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayat Land Development (Layout & Building) Rules, 2002 (amalgamated by G.O.Ms.No.67, dated 26.02.2002) requires the powers of the District Panchayat Officer or any officer to give instructions to the executing authority of the Gram Panchayat for necessary action for unauthorized construction/layout. In that view of the matter, this Court finds that there is substantial compliance of the order of this Court. Liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the District Panchayat Officer for further redressal, if any. The Contempt Case, with the above observations, is dismissed. _______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) 21.04.2011 KH