ORDER:

This contempt case is filed by the petitioners to punish the respondents for willful disobedience of the order dated

21.03.1978 passed by this Court in C.R.P.No.3266 of 1977.

2. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that petitioners herein are the legal heirs of the declarant. C.R.P.No.3266 of 1977 was filed by the petitioner therein which was allowed observing that the extent of holding of the petitioner and the excess, if any, to be surrendered by him, will be determined in the light of the findings contained in its order. Basing on the said order, the Land Reforms Tribunal (for short ‘LRT’) has disposed of the case directing the Tahsildar, Bachupalli to take necessary action stating that the declarant and his brother are entitled for one family holding each separately and entitled for two family holdings as against which they are having 2.5464 standard holding. As such, it was determined under Section 9 of the Telangana Land Reforms (COAH) Act, 1973 that the declarant is the surplus holder to an extent of 0.5464 standard holding. Though declarant filed Form VI, the property was not re-delivered to the petitioners. As such, the respondents have not obeyed the order in C.R.P and prayed this Court to punish them.

3. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government pleader submitted that the LRT has already complied the order of this Court in C.R.P., on 18.12.2019, the question of filing of contempt case does not arise. Further, the Government filed appeal against the LRT order. When there is an appeal filed by the Government, the question of compliance of the order of LRT does not arise. Further petitioners herein filed Writ petition for the same relief. Therefore, the contempt itself is not maintainable and requested the Court to close this contempt case.

4. After going through the said contentions, it is observed that this contempt case is filed alleging that the concerned authority has not complied the order of this Court in C.R.P.No.3266 of 1977. The order of this court is only to direct the LRT for determination of the proceeding basing on the observations in the C.R.P., and the same was complied by the LRT and against the LRT order, Government approached Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal. Further, as the petitioners have already filed writ petition, they can work out their remedies in the said writ petition. As the respondents have complied the order in C.R.P., this contempt is not maintainable.

5. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. No costs.

Miscellaneous petitions if any, pending shall stand closed.

_______________

K. SUJANA, J Date :17.04.2025 Rds THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CONTEMPT CASE NO.910 OF 2020 DATE :17.04.2025 Rds