THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.1361 of 2011 ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed alleging violation of the directions issued by this Court in the order, dated 05.11.2009 passed in Writ Petition No.23666 of 2009 as extended by order, dated 01.12.2009 and further extended by order, dated 18.02.2010. Petitioner claims that he is the owner and possessor of land admeasuring Acs.9.39 guntas covered by Survey No.3/2 situated at Annojiguda, Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. In the Writ Petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that though he is the owner and possessor of the said land, he is sought to be dispossessed from the portion of it for the purpose of constructing Outer Ring Road, without following due process of law. By way of interim order, this Court directed the respondents to maintain status quo with regard to possession of the land claimed by the petitioner. In this Contempt Case, it is the grievance of the petitioner that in spite of the status quo orders passed by this Court, in violation of the same, the respondents have made an attempt to dispossess him from the land in question by removing the bushes on it for constructing the road. In the counter-affidavit filed by the first respondent - Project Director/Outer Ring Road, Special Collector (Land Acquisition), Hyderabad Metro Development Authority, Tarnaka, Hyderabad, while denying various allegations of the petitioner, it is stated that after receiving the objection petition from the petitioner, survey was conducted on the spot; that as per the survey report, trench, which was dug for shifting of cable, is in Survey No.566 of Ghatkesar Village, which is already acquired by Hyderabad Metro Development Authority and that the trench, which was dug for shifting of cable is 50 feet distance from the boundaries of the land covered by Survey No.3/2 of Annojiguda Village. In this case, it appears, the land in Survey No.566 of Ghatkesar and the land in Survey No.3/2 of Annojiguda Village, which is claimed by the petitioner, are adjoining each other. When the petitioner is objecting on the ground that the trench is dug in the land covered by Survey No.3/2, the respondents ought to have conducted enquiry by getting it surveyed in his presence by issuing notice to him. No steps could have been taken on their own for conducting survey on the spot without notice to the petitioner, who is claiming the land as is of own. In the absence of any conclusive material before this Court, it cannot be said that the respondents have violated the directions issued by this Court in order, dated 05.11.2009. In view of the stand of the respondents in the counter-affidavit that the trench was dug in the land covered by Survey No.566 of Ghatkesar and it is 50 feet distance from the land in Survey No.3/2 of Annojiguda Village, which is claimed by the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to get surveyed the boundaries of the land covered by Survey No.566 of Ghatkesar, by submitting suitable application to the survey authorities. It is needless to observe that before taking up survey for fixing the boundaries of the land covered by Survey No.566, which is already acquired by HMDA, the petitioner be given notice and opportunity of hearing. Till such boundaries are fixed, no steps shall be taken by the respondents to construct the road on the disputed land. If an application is submitted by the respondents for fixing the boundaries of the land covered by Survey No.566 of Ghatkesar, I hope and trust that the survey authorities will take immediate steps and do the needful to resolve the dispute. Subject to the above observations, the Contempt Case is disposed of. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 31st OCTOBER, 2011. kvni