THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.728 of 2010 ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 alleging that the respondents have violated the directions issued by this Court in the order, dated 20.01.2010 passed in WPMP.No.37876 of 2009 in W.P.No.29237 of 2009. In the writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that respondents 2 and 3 are making construction contrary to the approved plan. As it was stated that the plan was approved only for the ground and first floor, this Court by order, dated 20.01.2010, stayed further constructions in the premises in question except on the ground and first floor. In this contempt case, it is the case of the petitioner that in spite of the directions issued by this Court, respondents 2 and 3 started work on 27.04.2010 and are proceeding with the construction of upper floors. A detailed counter-affidavit is filed by respondent No.1 - Commissioner, Ongole Municipality. While denying various allegations levelled against him by the petitioner, respondent No.1 stated that respondents 2 and 3 did not start any construction work on 27.04.2010. He further stated that on receipt of the orders passed by this Court, inspection was conducted and stage of construction was noted. He also stated that subsequent to receipt of the telegram, which was got issued on behalf of the petitioner, they conducted inspection and found that no further constructions are undertaken by respondents 2 and 3. Though it is stated in the counter-affidavit that after this Court passed order, dated 20.01.2010 staying further constructions in the premises in question, no constructions were taken up by respondents 2 and 3, the same is not disputed by the petitioner by filing reply affidavit. As it is evident from the counter-affidavit that no further constructions were taken up by respondents 2 and 3 after this Court passed order, dated 20.01.2010, it cannot be said that respondents 2 and 3 have violated the said order by making further constructions. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in this contempt case, which is accordingly dismissed. However, respondent No.1 shall ensure that no further constructions are taken up by respondents 2 and 3 in terms of the order, dated 20.01.2010 passed by this Court. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 2nd JULY, 2010. kvni