THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH C.C.No.531 of 2011 ORDER: This contempt case is filed alleging that the respondents intentionally and wilfully disobeyed the order, dated 05-05-2010, passed by this court in W.P.M.P.No.13981 of 2010 in W.P.No.10946 of 2010, wherein the respondents were directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring Ac.0-46 cents and Ac.0-25 cents in Sy.Nos.880/3 and 881/8 respectively of Budamgunta Village, Kavali Mandal, Nellore District, pending disposal of the writ petition without following the due process of law. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without resuming the said assigned lands, without following the due process of law and without issuing any notice, the respondents are attempting to dispossess the petitioner from the lands in question in wilful disobedience of the order of this Court. A counter has been filed stating that pursuant to proceedings, dated 08-07-2008, the land admeasuring 25 cents in Sy.No.881/8 was resumed by the Government and that the land admeasuring 46 cents in Sy.No.880/3 was also resumed by the Government in the year 1999. As the counter affidavit did not contain the particulars of the resumption of aforesaid assigned lands, this court by order, dated 30- 09-2011, directed the respondents to produce the resumption orders, as the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that no notice has been issued before resuming the said land and in fact, the resumption orders also have not been served on the petitioner. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents produced a copy of the so-called resumption order, which indicates that no notice has been issued to the petitioner before resuming the said assigned lands. A perusal of the resumption order goes to show that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kavali, issued notices to the assignees/legal heirs requiring them to file objections and that notices have been served on the assignees/legal heirs, but a perusal of the last page of the resumption order discloses that notice was affixed on the notice board of the gram panchayat. However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that no notice has been issued to the petitioner, that no resumption order has been served on the petitioner, that the lands in question are still in possession of the petitioner, that the lands in question were not resumed and that house site pattas were not given to the landless poor beneficiaries as alleged by the respondents. I am not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the aforesaid contentions of the petitioner and also with regard to the legality or validity of the said resumption order, as the main writ petition is still pending and it is for the petitioner to seek appropriate amendment of the writ prayer or to file a fresh writ petition questioning the said resumption order, as the legality or validity of the said resumption order cannot be decided in this contempt case. Accordingly, the contempt case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 21-10-2011 Note: Issue C.C. in one week (B/o) Prv