KHANWILKAR A.M., J.: - Heard Counsel for the parties. Perused the relevant documents and pleadings on record.

2. This petition is to initiate action against respondents 2, 3 and 4 for having committed wilful breach of the order passed by this Court dated 14th July 2005. Briefly stated, the Corporation issued notice under section 299 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act in respect of the disputed structure. That action was challenged by the petitioners by way of Suit being Suit No. 2993 of 200 1 before the City Civil Court. The said Suit came to be dismissed on 12th July 2005. The petitioners prayed for stay to enable the petitioners to take up the matter in Appeal. However, that prayer was rejected by the trial Court. The petitioners accordingly rushed to this Court and filed First Appeal being First Appeal (Stamp) No. 16139 of 2005 on 13th July 2005. However, as there was no interim protection in respect of the suit structure, the officials of the Corporation proceeded to demolish the same on 13th July 2005. In this backdrop, the petitioners moved Civil Application (Stamp) No. 16287 of 2005 before this Court placing on record that the concerned Officials have demolished the suit structure on 13th July 2005. The petitioners by the said Application have prayed that, the respondent No. 1 Corporation be directed to reconstruct the two W.C. and one bathroom situated at Saurashtra Vanza Gnyati Yuvak Mandal, Gnatiniwadi, Mathuradas Road, Kandivali (West), Mumbai - 67 and in the alternative, the petitioners may be permitted to reconstruct the same. This Application was moved before the learned Single Judge of this Court on 14th July 2005. The Court passed the following order on the said application:

"MENTIONED NOT ON BOARD. .

Heard the learned Advocate for the applicants. Notice to respondents. Returnable after six weeks.

In the meantime parties shall maintain status quo with regard to the suit properties as on today. In the meantime the office objections to be removed and the appeal shall be placed on board after six weeks." [emphasis supplied]

3. The grievance in this petition is that inspite of knowledge of status quo order passed by this Court, the contemnors who are Officials of respondent Corporation, proceeded with the work of removing the debris lying on the site accumulated on account of demolition of the suit structure and later on started excavation work and completed construction of gutter/drainage line. The petitioners have relied on photographs taken from time to time of such work undertaken at the instance of the contemnors till the filing of the present Contempt petition. In other words, the case of the petitioners is that, in spite of knowledge of order of status quo, the Officials proceeded with further work on the suit site, in utter disregard of the order of status quo. Relevant averments can be discerned from Paragraphs 10 and 11 of the Memo of Contempt petition which read thus:

"10. Recently on 7th January, 2006, the respondent No. 2 Shri Apte along with other officers/servants and employees of the respondent No.1, in violation and breach of the status quo order have removed all the debris and carried out further digging work and have completed construction of gutter/drainage line. Hereto annexed and marked Exhibits F to F2 are the copies of the photographs taken between 7th January, 2005, to 13th January, 2006, showing construction. By carrying out further digging operation, Construction of gutter/drainage line, levelling of the land, removing the debris have committed contempt of order of status quo passed by this Honourable Court. The respondents are, therefore, disobeying the Orders of this Honourable Court and have committed gross violation and the respondents have no respect to the orders of this Honourable Court. The Officers of the respondent No. 1 along with respondent No.2 were personally present on site and it is under their supervisi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document