THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.1597 of 2010 Dated:15.04.2011 Between: C.V.Siva Rami Reddy. ...Petitioner And Smt.K.Madhavi Latha, And another. ...Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.1597 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner filed a writ petition aggrieved by the inaction of the second respondent in issuing duplicate pattadar pass books in respect of land in survey No.635/1 to 5 of Mulasagaram Village of Nandyal Mandal in Kurnool District. This Court disposed of the said writ petition, being W.P.No.9232 of 2010, on 27.04.2010. The order reads as under. ORDER: Petitioner is allegedly owner of small extents of lands in survey Nos.635/1 to 5 etc. He obtained pattadar pass books in December 2003 being pass book No.698. It appears that when he lost the same in 2007, he made representation to second respondent requesting for duplicate pass book in 2008, in vain. This Court heard the counsel for petitioner and the Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Andhra Area). Rule 31(1) of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Rules, 1989, deals with issue of duplicate pass book and title deed. It also contemplates enquiry to be conducted by person applying for duplicate pass book duly paying a sum of Rs.1,000/-. Therefore, liberty is given to petitioner to pay requisite fee and make fresh application giving all details. As and when the same is made, the Tahsildar, Nandyal, shall enquire into the matter and pass appropriate orders. This exercise may be completed within a period of two months from the date of filing of proper application along with fee. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Alleging that duplicate pattadar pass books are not issued, the present contempt case is filed. After receiving the notice in Form No.I both the contemnors appeared in the Court on 07.04.2011. They sought time to pass necessary orders as directed by this Court. Today, the Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Andhra Area) has placed before this Court a copy of the proceedings bearing No.Rc B/1278/2010, dated 09.04.2011, passed by the second respondent informing that the pattadar pass books cannot be granted to the petitioner for various reasons mentioned therein. As this Court directed the second respondent to consider the request of the petitioner for grant of duplicate pattadar pass books and pass appropriate orders, passing of an order is due compliance, and the contempt case is misconceived. The proceedings of the second respondent dated 09.04.20011 is made part of the record. The contempt case is accordingly dismissed. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 15.04.2011 vs