THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.100 of 2011 ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed alleging that the respondents have violated the directions issued by this Court in order, dated 24.08.2010 in Writ Petition No.20358 of 2010, which was filed by the petitioners seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering representation, dated 07.08.2010 for grant of house-site pattas in the land covered by Survey Nos.237 and 238 of Mukthinuthalapadu Village of Prakasam District, as illegal. As it was noticed that number of writ petitioners were already granted pattas and steps were also being taken to consider house-site pattas to remaining petitioners, the writ petition was disposed of directing the respondents to verify eligibility of the remaining petitioners, who are not granted house-sites, and consider their claim subject to availability of the land covered by Survey Nos.237 and 238 of Mukthinuthalapadu Village. In this Contempt Case, it is the allegation of the petitioners that in spite of such a direction, the respondents have not considered their claim. The third respondent - Tahsildar, Ongole Mandal, Prakasam District, has filed a counter-affidavit. In the counter-affidavit, while denying various allegations made by the petitioners, it is categorically stated that the Tahsildar, Ongole Mandal, who personally inspected the land on 01.03.2011 along with the Mandal Surveyor, Additional Revenue Inspector and Village Revenue Officer of Mukthinuthalapadu Village and after enquiry, he found that the second petitioner only is residing in that Village and remaining persons are not residing in the Village. It is stated that during inspection, it was noticed that no plots are available in aforesaid Survey Numbers, as such, no house-sites can be granted in the land in question. When the inspection was made pursuant to the directions issued by this Court to consider grant of house-sites to the persons, who are not granted house-sites already, it cannot be said that the respondents have violated the directions issued by this Court. In the order itself, it is clearly mentioned that the direction was only to consider the claim of remaining petitioners subject to availability of the land in Survey Nos.237 and 238 of Mukthinuthalapadu Village. As evident from the counter-affidavit, no plots are available in the aforesaid Survey Numbers. In that view of the matter, it cannot be said that the respondents have violated the directions issued by this Court attracting the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. As it is stated that the second petitioner is the resident of Mukthinuthalapadu Village, it is open to the respondents to consider her claim, whenever similar claims have been considered for grant of house-sites in any other land, which is available. Subject to the above observations, the Contempt Case is dismissed. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 21st JUNE, 2011. kvni