In this short order, the Hon'ble Court addressed a contempt petition alleging violation of a directed timeline to consider a land grant claim. Finding no deliberate violation as the rejection was reasoned and delays were not intentional, the contempt case was closed.
The Contempt Case No.430 of 2016 was closed.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.KODANDA RAM
CONTEMPT CASE No.430 of 2016
ORDER:
Alleging violation of the order of this Court, in W.P.No.7372 of 2015 dated 20.03.2015, this Contempt Case is filed.
Under the aforementioned order, considering the claim of the petitioner for issuance of pattadar pass books and title deeds in respect of the land, admeasuring Ac.0.08 guntas in Sy.No.390 of Torrur Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, under the category of landless poor, this Court directed the respondent herein to consider the representation dated 28.01.2015 for grant of patta within a period of six weeks.
When the matter is listed today, learned Government Pleader for Revenue places on record the proceedings of the Deputy Collector and Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal, dated 19.04.2016, wherein the claim of the petitioner for grant of patta has been considered and rejected by passing a detailed reasoned order.
Though there is delay in passing the order, considering various aspects set out in the order itself, particularly, the petitioner does not have any right to claim to be a landless poor, I do not find any deliberate violation on the part of the respondent in passing the order dated 19.04.2016. Leaving it open to the petitioner to avail remedies as are available to him in law, the Contempt Case is closed.
The Contempt Case is, accordingly, closed.
____________________
C.KODANDA RAM,J
Date:21.06.2016 usd
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of over a year in rejecting the petitioner's claim to be a landless poor and granting patta amounts to deliberate violation warranting contempt proceedings.
Whether the Departmental Officer's reasoning justifies the rejection of the claim despite the delay.
Whether the Contempt Case should be closed given the absence of deliberate violation.
Petitioner (representing claimant for pattadar pass book)
Government Pleader for Revenue
C.Kodanda Ram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
