In this contempt case regarding willful disobedience of a court order to allot alternative land plots, the court accepted the respondent Collector's assurance of compliance within three months and closed the case.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
CONTEMPT CASE No.1228 of 2014
Dated: 12.09.2014
Between:
J.L. Narasimham and another. and Sri N. Sridhar, District Collector, Ranga Reddy District.
.. Petitioners
.. Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr. K.L.B. Kumar
Counsel for the Respondent: G.P. for Revenue (Telangana)
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This contempt case is filed alleging willful disobedience of order dated 14.11.2013 in W.P.No.17385 of 2013.
By the above-mentioned order, the erstwhile Government of A.P. and the respondent herein were directed to consider allotment of alternative plots to the petitioners in terms of report dated 29.06.2012 of the Tahsildar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, within one month from the date of receipt of the order and that if, for any reason, allotment of alternative plots is not possible, they shall handover plot Nos.145 and 146, belonging to the petitioners, back to the petitioners within the above-mentioned stipulated time.
In compliance with the direction of this Court, Mr. N. Sridhar, District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, is personally present. He has also filed a counter-affidavit, wherein he has inter alia stated that earnest efforts are being made to provide alternative plots to the petitioners and that in view of the opinion expressed by C.C.L.A., the issue is being placed before the Land Management Authority (LMA) for onward recommendation to the Government. The respondent has requested for six months’ time for compliance of the order of this Court.
In my opinion, the State Government as well as the respondent ought to have either complied with the direction of this Court within the stipulated time or sought extension of time, if they had justifiable reasons for seeking such extension.
The learned Government Pleader for Revenue, Telangana State, while fairly conceding that there is lapse on the part of the executive apparatus in following the above requirement, however, requested that at least three months’ time may be granted to enable
the State Government of Telangana and the respondent to comply with the direction of this Court relating to allotment of alternative plots to the petitioners. The respondent, who is personally present in the Court, has positively assured that within three months, the order of this Court will be fully complied with by allotment of alternative plots to the petitioners.
In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the contempt case is closed, by placing on record the assurance given by the respondent.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
12th September, 2014 IBL
J.L. Narasimham
Sri N. Sridhar
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
