IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.561 of 2010 Between: Dr.Ashan Qureshi ... PETITIONER a n d Sri Dr.Sameer Sharma and another … RESPONDENTS ORDER: This contempt case has been filed complaining disobedience of the order dated 28-08-2008 passed in W.P.No.14038 of 2008. 2. Notice before admission came to be ordered on 13-04-2010. 3. The respondents entered appearance and filed counter- affidavit. It is stated in the counter-affidavit that structures existing on the premises have been demolished even much prior to filing of the writ petition since the structures were in dilapidated and dangerous condition. It is further stated in the counter-affidavit that with regard to acquisition of land, proposals have been sent to the Special Deputy Collector for Land Acquisition, GHMC, and possession of the land has not been taken. Relevant portion of the counter-affidavit reads as hereunder: “In this connection, it is respectfully submitted that, as admitted by the petitioner in his representation dated 02-03-2006 the premises No.21-2-386 and 21-2-387 was demolished long back on 26-11-1988 on the consent given by the petitioner to the then Commissioner of M.C.H. and remaining portion i.e., premises No.21-2-381 and the walls of premises No.21-2-386 and 21-2-387 were demolished there after on 04-08-2007 after issuing notice under Section 459 of HMC Act, on the ground that they became dilapidated and endanger to the public, since the entire property was demolished prior to the said W.P. question of violation of the orders passed in the W.P. does not arise. Hence, there is no cause of action for filing the contempt case, as such it is liable to be dismissed on this ground above. With regard to alleged raising of structure on 29/30-01- 2010 by the Assistant Engineer of the respondent corporation, it is respectfully submitted that on the said date, when the said Asst. Engineer was supervising the laying of existing road infront of the property in question, the petitioner himself requested him to fill up pot holes appearing on his property in question. The Asst. Engineer, while conceding to his humble request filled up the pot holes with the waste material used for paying of the existing road, except this no structure is raised by the said Asst. Engineer of the respondent corporation as alleged in the affidavit. Hence, the allegation made against the respondents that they have violated the orders of this Hon’ble Court dated 28-08-2008 in W.P.No.14038 of 2008 is false and baseless. These respondents are not yet taken the property in possession of the petitioners for road widening as held by this Hon’ble Court, in fact, there respondents are already submitted proposals for acquiring the property in question and under Land Acquisition Act to the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition Cell, GHMC and intending to proceed with road widening work after taking the possession of the property from the petitioner under proposed Land Acquisition proceedings.” 4. When the contempt case came up for admission hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 5. Heard learned Standing Counsel for GHMC appearing for respondents 1 and 2. 6. Learned Standing Counsel submits that the petitioner filed a suit being O.S.No.497 of 2009 claiming compensation of Rs.24,00,000/- for demolition of structures existing in the premises and the said suit is pending for trial. A further submission has made that with regard to the acquisition of the land, proposals have already been sent and they are pending consideration and as on this day possession of the petitioner’s land has not been taken. 7. The direction given in the writ petition is in the event of the premises owned by the petitioner is required for road widening, the respondents have to follow the due process of law. As on this day, the respondents have not taken possession of the property and the proposals are pending with the Land Acquisition Officer. Such is the situation, the contention of the petitioner that the respondents have violated the order dated 28-08-2008 in W.P.No.14038 of 2008 has no substance. 8. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J August 04, 2010. PN THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.561 of 2010 August 04, 2010