IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) TUESDAY THE FOURTEENH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND SIX : PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI G.S. SINGHVI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CONTEMPT CASE No. 209 OF 2006 Between Attada Sailaja Venugopal W/o. Venugopal Naidu, Managing Partner, M/s. Sai Theertha Associates (Regd.No. 12/03), Visakhapatnam. Petitioner AND 1. Sri D.C. Rosaiah, Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. Sri A.B. Krishna Reddy, Commissioner of Endowment Department, Tilak Nagar, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. 3. Sri T.N.S. Sharma, Manager, Sri Embernmanner Swamy Vari Temple, Kanchera Veedhi, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 4. Sri M.V.S.S. Vishnu Prasad, Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. . .Respondents The Contempt Case filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts praying the High Court to punish the respondents under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act for willful and deliberate violatin of the order issued in W.P.No. 16474 of 2005 dated 17.10.2005. The Contempt Case coming on for hearing upon perusing the Case and the affidavit filed herein and the order of the High Court dated: 24-02-2006 made herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri V.R. Avula, Advocate for petitioner and of Smt. M. Vidyavathi, Advocate for respondent No.3, the Court made the following ORDER “Sri V.R. Avula for the petitioner, Smt. M. Vidyavathi for respondent No. 3. Learned counsel for non-petitioner No. 3 says that the direction given by the Court for registration of the document has been complied with and possession of the land in question has been handed over to the petitioner. The aforementioned statement of the learned counsel for non- petitioner No. 3 should have, ordinarily, resulted in disposal of the contempt petition, which would have necessarily resulted in addition of one number to the total number of cases disposed of by the Court, but we feel that the contempt proceedings cannot be equated with execution proceedings and the blatant non-compliance of the directions of the Court cannot be compounded simply by accepting the statement of the counsel that order has now been complied with. Non-petitioner No. 3 is directed to file his affidavit to explain as to why the time-bound direction given by the Court had not been complied with till day before yesterday. Learned counsel for non-petitioner No. 3 requests, and we allow her seven days time to file the required affidavit. List the case on March 21, 2006”. DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. Sri D.C. Rosaiah, Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. Sri A.B. Krishna Reddy, Commissioner of Endowment Department, Tilak Nagar, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. 3. Sri T.N.S. Sharma, Manager, Sri Embernmanner Swamy Vari Temple, Kanchera Veedhi, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 4. Sri M.V.S.S. Vishnu Prasad, Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. (Addressees 1 to 4 by RPAD with a copy of petition and affidavit) 5. One CC to Sri. V.R.Avula, Advocate (OPUC). 6. Two spare copies. Ksv HIGH COURT Ksv Date of drafting: 16-03-2006 HCJ & GBPJ DATE: 14-03-2006 NOTE: LIS THE CASE ON MARCH 21, 2006 ORDER C.C. NO. 209 OF 2006 DIRECTION