THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE NO.546 OF 2009 O R D E R: The petitioners filed W.P.No.4156 of 2008 ventilating their grievance about payment of compensation in respect of deletion of Ac.1.78 cents of land in Survey No.76/2 of Iyyavarkandriga, Krishnapatnam Village, Muthukuru Mandal, Nellore District from the notification published under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. They also prayed for interim order to stop disbursement of any payment towards exgratia or compensation for that land. Interim order was passed on 25.09.2008 in WPMP No.27759 of 2008 initially for a period of three years and thereafter, it was extended until further orders. This Contempt Case is filed alleging that despite the interim order passed by this Court, the respondents have paid the exgratia to different individuals. The respondents filed counter-affidavit as well as the supporting documents. It is stated that cheques for exgratia in respect of the land referred to above were issued to three beneficiaries/owners on 24.09.2008 and that the order passed by this Court was communicated telegraphically only at 3.20 p.m on 27.09.2008. It is also mentioned that soon after receiving the telegraphic order, the second respondent addressed letter to the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Muthukuru Branch, Nellore District, with a request to stop payment. Reference was also made to reply dated 29.09.2008 of the Branch Manager, wherein it was mentioned that the cheques were presented to the Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank, Muthukuru, and the payment was made on 27.09.2008 itself. Heard Sri P.Sridhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. It is no doubt true that the interim order dated 25.09.2008, passed by this Court, prevented the respondents from making payment of compensation/exgratia for the land referred to above. The fact, however, remains that the cheques were issued one day prior thereto. There was delay in communication of the orders of this Court. The second respondent received the same only at 3.20 p.m on 27.09.2008 and soon thereafter he has taken necessary steps to ensure that the payment is stopped. His effort did not fructify since the cheques were encashed already. In the light of the facts mentioned above, it cannot be said that there was any contempt, much less wilful disobedience, on the part of the respondents. Hence, the Contempt Case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dated 11th August, 2009 vrn