HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.2455 OF 2023 ORDER : (ORAL)

This contempt case is filed by the petitioners aggrieved by the wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 11.09.2023 passed by this Court in W.P. No.25166 of 2023.

2. Heard Mr. T.Ramchander Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. Katta Pradeep Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent;

and perused the material on record.

3. Order dated 11.09.2023 was passed by this Court in W.P. No.25166 of 2023 directing respondent herein/contemnor (respondent No.5 in the writ petition) to act upon the representations dated 06.05.2023 and 29.08.2023 of the petitioners and file action taken report by the next date of hearing. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted the despite such order being passed by this Court, no action has been taken by the respondent which amounts to wilful and deliberate disobedience of the said order.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submitted that on receiving the complaint from the petitioners, notice vide G.P. No.93/2023 dated 28.08.2023 was issued to the unofficial respondents in the writ petition to stop further construction in the subject property. Further, second notice vide G.P. No.175/2023 dated 02.09.2023 was issued to the unofficial respondents and subsequently, letter was addressed to the Sub-Inspector of Police vide G.P. No.174/2023 dated 01.09.2023. Basing on such letter and the order of this Court, Police protection was taken by the respondent herein; he visited the disputed property on 25.09.2023 and ordered the unofficial respondents to stop further construction. That as per the order of this Court, the D.P.O. issued letter No.R2/893/2023-Pts dated 14.09.2023 directing Gram Panchayat to take necessary action. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that during the physical inspection of the subject property, it was found that no shed was constructed in the said property and there is only a basement which was raised prior to the order dated 11.09.2023 passed by this Court. That when the authorities intended to dismantle the basement, the unofficial respondents informed that they have applied for DTCP permission and requested the authorities not to dismantle the basement. It is submitted that technical approval was granted by the Director of Town and Country Planning, Hyderabad vide Lr.D.Dis.No.1468/436/2023/W, dated 12.10.2023.

5. The submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent that no further construction activity is being undertaken in the subject property is not rebutted by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 6. In the circumstances, this contempt case is closed giving liberty to the petitioners to file fresh contempt case if there is any further violation and subject to the further orders that may be passed in W.P. No.25166 of

2023. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this contempt case stand closed.

_______________________

B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J July 18, 2025

RRK