IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CONTEMPT CASE NO : 928 of 2008 Between: Challa Venkata Subba Reddy ..... PETITIONER AND N.Eswaraiah .....RESPONDENT(S) HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA C.C.No.928 of 2008 ORDER: This contempt case is filed alleging willful disobedience on the part of the respondent-Special Deputy Collector, Somasila project Unit-IV, Rajampet, Kadapa District, in not implementing the order dated 28-04- 2008 passed by this Court in W.P.No.7465 of 2008, whereby and whereunder, this Court, while disposing of the writ petition, directed the respondent herein as follows: “It may not be necessary for this Court to go into various contentions put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner and it is suffice to direct the 1st respondent-Special Deputy Collector to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 26-03-2008 and pass necessary orders as to whether the petitioner is entitled to the payment of enhanced compensation, only after affording the petitioner and the 2nd respondent an opportunity of being heard. If ultimately, the authority feels that the petitioner alone is entitled to the payment of enhanced compensation, he may pay it to him, but if he feels that there is a dispute between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent with regard to the payment of enhanced compensation, he may refer the mater to a competent Civil Court as contemplated under Section 31 of the Act. This entire exercise shall be done, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 2. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed stating that a reference under Section 18 of the land Acquisition Act (for brevity ‘the Act’), was made to Lok Adalat and there was a settlement between the parties, and the petitioner has got compensation towards structures and, respondents therein through whom the 2nd respondent is claiming compensation, were paid compensation for the land. Later at the instance of all the landholders, the amount of compensation was enhanced by the Government i.e. the authorities under the Land Acquisition Act. After coming to know about it, the petitioner made representations dated 26-03-2008 and 24-04-2008, requesting the respondent to pay him the enhanced compensation. As the said representations are not considered by the respondent, the petitioner approached this Court and filed the above writ petition and this Court passed the order dated 28-04-2008 in W.P.No.7465 of 2008 directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner. However, the respondent before receiving the said orders considered the representation of the petitioner dated 24-04-2008 and passed a detailed order on 29-04-2008 rejecting the petitioner’s claim. Again after receiving the orders of this Court, an enquiry was conducted as directed by this Court, and according to the respondent, the petitioner approached him and gave an application as provided for under Section 18 of the Act and the same is under consideration. 3. From the above, it is clear that the representations of the petitioner dated 26-03-2008 and 24-04-2008 were already considered by the respondent by his endorsement dated 29-04-2008. In view of the same, this Court cannot hold that the respondent/contemnor had violated the orders passed by this Court. 4. Accordingly, the contempt case is closed. ______________________ 14th December 2009 KVR