IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4106 of 2009 Between: Raj Narayan Joshi S/o. Late Bhaskar Rao Joshi R/o. 13-6-827 & 828, Mogul Ka Nala, Karwan, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Collector Hyderabad Division At Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Director Survey & Land Records Hyderabad, At Nampally, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to pass an order or orders one in the nature of writ of mandamus by declaring the inaction of the respondent No.1 and 2 for not complying the orders of the Hon'ble High Court passed in W.P.No. 24057 / 2005 dated 10-11-2005 after giving several representation and notices and disposing off the application dt. 23-9-2005 made by the petitioner to the respondent No. 1 and 2 for demarcation as per the provisions of A.P. Survey and Boundaries Act 1923 in respect of the Sy.No.182/1, 182/2 co-related to T.S.NO.11/1 and 11/2 situated at Mogul ka Nala, Gudimalkapur Village, Asif Nagar Mandal, Hyderabad and declare the same as totally illegal, arbitrary against the principle of natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SURESH SHIV SAGAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.4106 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed with a prayer to declare the inaction on the part of the respondents in implementing the directions issued by this Court in its order, dated 10.11.2005, in W.P.No.24057 of 2005. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. The known course in law, for implementation of the orders passed by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is to file a contempt case under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Filing a writ petition for the exclusive relief of implementation of the orders in another writ petition is almost unknown. Further, in case the violation on the part of the respondents is continuous, the petitioner can certainly explain the same to bring the contempt case within the period of limitation. The writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue the remedies under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.Narasimha Reddy, J Dt.02.03.2009 Note: Issue CC in three days. (b/o) VGB