Point of Law: when the contemnor deliberately and willfully violated the order of the Court, he is liable for consequences under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, but the Court cannot be hyper sensitive in taking action against the contemnor.

ORDER :

1. This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent herein i.e. Sri. J. Sivasankar Naik, Tahsildar, C-Belagal Mandal, Kurnool District, as per the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for willful and deliberate disobedience of the order, dated 16.09.2021 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 20370 of 2021, alleging that this Court issued a direction in the above Writ Petition declaring the endorsement in Rc. A/08/2021, dated 13.07.2021 as illegal, arbitrary, and consequently set aside the same, while, directing the 4th respondent in the Writ Petition, to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law for mutation of petitioner's name in the revenue records for the land in Sy. No. 340/1 admeasuring an extent of Ac. 11.73 cents, strictly adhering to the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971.

2. After receipt of the order, the petitioner allegedly made a representation, dated 13.10.2021 to the District Collector, Kurnool Revenue Divisional Officer, Kurnool and the Tahsildar, C. Belagal Mandal, the contemnor herein Guduru Sub-Division, Kurnool, through registered post duly enclosing a copy of the order in W.P. No. 20370 of 2021. Receipt of the same was acknowledged by the respondent/contemnor herein and other officers. Though the order was received, the respondent/contemnor did not implement the order, but issued an endorsement, dated 03.11.2021 in Rc. B.144/202 in utter disregard of the direction issued by this Court, which amounts to willful and deliberate disobedience of the order of this Court, requested to take appropriate action to punish the respondent/ contemnor for disobeying the orders of this Court under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act.

3. The respondent/contemnor filed reply affidavit to the counter affidavit, alleging that the petitioner earlier filed W.P. No. 20370 of 2021 for not issuing Pattadar Passbook for the land in Sy. No. 340/1 admeasuring an extent of Ac. 11.73 cents in Kothakota village fields, C. Belagal Mandal, Guduru Sub-Division, Kurnool District and issued an endorsement rejecting the claim of petitioner vide Rc. B.144/2021, dated 03.11.2021. He also submitted that the application of petitioner submitted through meeseva bearing Application No. RMU-012106923123 was got enquired strictly adhering to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Right in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971. A notice in Form-VIII was generated and issued to all the persons, whose names are entered in the Record of Rights, who are interested in or affected by the amendment and to any other persons to be interested therein, as to why the amendment should not be carried out under Section 5(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass books Act, 1971. The said notice was also published in Tahsildar's Office, Mandal Parishad Development Officer's Office, Grama Sachivalayam and also made tom-tom in Kotha Kota village.

4. It is further contended that in response to the notice, the Superintendent, Inspector Auditor, Waqfs, Collectorate, Kurnool District in his Letter F. No. 54/Waqfs/KNL/2021, dated 25.10.2021 has stated that the Masjid land in Sy. No. 340 admeasuring an extent of Ac. 12.07 cents of Kothakota village belongs to Waqfs Department. The details of the land published in A.P. Gazette No. 43-A, dated 24.10.1963 at S. No. 3140 were also submitted. He further submitted that as per the revenue records also i.e. RSR of Kothakota village, the land stands registered in the name of Erladinne Mazid under T.D. No. 464. The Ryotwari pattas issued by Inam Deputy Tahsildar are not binding on the waqf land under Inam Abolition Act and does not change the character of the Waqf. The said land is Waqf and in-alienable, the third parties have no rights to claim the land in question and finally requested not to issue any Pattadar Passbooks to any third parties for the subject land in question and also request