( 1 ) THE contempt petition as been filed for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for wilful disobedience of the ordere of this Court dated 30. 07. 1993, 21. 01. 1947 and 27. 10. 1997 passed in CW No. 4106/1991 and in review application 10/1997 filed in the said writ petition.

( 2 ) A further prayer is also made to restrain the respondents from evicting the bona fide residents of jhuggi jhonpri in Sawan Park until the directions made in the aforesaid orders are complied with.

( 3 ) THE decision rendered by the Division Bench in cw No. 4106/1991 on 30. 07. 1993 dealt with the issue of allotment of plots to the occupants of the Sawan Park colony and the draw of lots held for allotment in november, 1991. The Division Bench held that the project for re-settlement of weavers in Sawan Park was not confined to these weavers whose jhuggis were affected on account of construction of storm water drainage road passing through jhuggis. A writ of mandamus was thus issued directing to make allotment in the first instance to 650 persons who had been issued allotment cum demand letters. Liberty was granted to respondent DDA to re-check this list after due notices to all persons falling in the list of 650 persons on the basis of scheme that it was for re-settlement of all the weavers living in jhuggi jhonpris in Sawan Park earlier to 1985 and the list was to be finalised within a period of three months and allotment to be made within six months.

( 4 ) APPLICATIONS were filed subsequently for implementation of aforesaid directions and in terms of the order dated 21. 1. 1997 it was noted that apparently respondent DDA had not carried out directions with respect to the persons other than 650 persons, who had earlier been found to have in their possession documents. The following directions was thus issued in the application:

" (A) display a list mentioning therein the names of 650 persons, who had been give allotment cum-demand letter, the names of 489 persons out of the same, identified by it for whom allotment cum demand letters are elated to have been issued and also those who have not been found eligible for allotment;

(B) with respect to the remaining persons respondent No. 1 will make similar exercise contained in order dated July 30, 1993 in finalising the list of the remaining weavers who had been living in jhuggi-jhopari s in Sawan park prior to 1985, and have not been allotted any plot by the DDA, Municipal Corporation of delhi or any other local authority in the Union territory of Delhi and to whom allotment-cum-demand letters were issued and who made payment in terms of the allotment letter.

( 5 ) A review application No. 10/1997 was filed by DDA for reviewing of the order dated 21. 1. 1997 praying for direction b aforesaid to be deleted. However, the division Bench dismissed the review application noting that no further clarification was required in terms of the order dated 21. 1. 1997 and thus the following necessary directions had been made:

" (A) That the above lists includes people who are not bonafide residents of the Sawan Park weavers colony and;

(B) That this list does not take into account the bonafide claims of genuine residents of the cluster who were residing there, before 1985. "

( 6 ) IN the reply affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 4 being the DDA it is stated that the name of first petitioner did not figure in any list prepared by respondent No. 4. The name of second petitioner did figure in the list prepared by respondent No. 4 but no demand cum allotment letter was issued to the petitioner. It is further stated that a survey of 949 persons had been carried out who were originally considered for allotment. It is also stated that in pursuance to the directions passed by the Court on 21. 1. 1997, a further survey of the area was made and alternative plots to 219 persons out of 299 persons who had been left out of the total 949 persons after re-checking of the record was