HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY C.C.No.1569 of 2010 Date : 21-1-2011 Between : Smt.B.Vinodhini .. Petitioner And Sri M.Dana Kishore, District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. .. Respondent Counsel for petitioner : Sri Srinivas Polavarapu Counsel for respondent : Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue The Court made the following : ORDER: This Contempt case is filed alleging wilful disobedience of order dated 8-4-2010 in W.P.No.20680/2005. In obedience to the notice issued by this court, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, was personally present on 30-12-2010 and made a statement in the Court that an extent of 1289 sq. yards situate in Khajaguda village was identified for being handed over to the petitioner in lieu of payment of compensation for acquiring 2182 sq. yards of land belonging to the petitioner and that the same will be handed over to the petitioner within two days. Today, at the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue has placed before the court a copy of panchanama dated 6-1-2011 evincing handing over of the above mentioned extent of land to the petitioner. Sri Srinivas Polavarapu, learned counsel for the petitioner while admitting that the above mentioned extent of land was handed over to his client, has however, stated that the respondent has not properly worked out the value of the land taken over from the petitioner and consequently the extent of land to be handed over to the petitioner in lieu of compensation was reduced. The learned counsel further stated that the respondent has not properly computed the actual extent of land taken over from the petitioner leading to severe injustice being caused to his client. In my opinion, these issues raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner do not fall within the scope of this Contempt Case. If the petitioner feels aggrieved by the action of the respondent in respect of the above aspects, she needs to avail appropriate remedy by way of substantive proceeding. For the above mentioned reasons, the Contempt Case is closed with liberty to the petitioner in terms of the above observations. ____________________ C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy.,J Date : 21-1-2011 AM