Telangana High Court
CC/1878/2012 of Kaveri Balachandra Reddy, Vs Sri B. Sridhar, on 28 December 2012
SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Contempt Case No.1878 of 2012 ORDER: The petitioners filed W.P.No.18434 of 2012 feeling aggrieved by the refusal on the part of the 1st respondent therein to furnish the particulars of market value of the land in survey No.21/1 of Kanuparthipadu Village,
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY
Contempt Case No.1878 of 2012
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioners filed W.P.No.18434 of 2012 feeling aggrievedby the refusal on the part of the 1[st] respondent therein to furnish theparticulars of market value of the land in survey No.21/1 ofKanuparthipadu Village, Nellore Mdnal and District. Since it wasfound that the respondents are treating it as assigned Governmentland, it was left open to the petitioners to submit a representation to theDistrict Collector, the respondent herein, as regards the classificationof the land. Six weeks time was stipulated for disposal of therepresentation. This contempt case is filed stating that the respondentdid not comply with the orders of this Court.
The respondent filed a counter-affidavit. It is stated that therepresentation submitted by the petitioners has been examined andthe result thereof has been communicated to him through proceedings,dated 05.11.2012. He has also tendered apology for the delay inpassing the said order.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learnedGovernment Pleader for Revenue.
It is no doubt true that there was some delay on the part of therespondent in complying with the orders of this Court. The facthowever remains that the representation submitted by the petitionershas been considered and an order was passed. It is brought to thenotice of this Court that the petitioners instituted proceedings, feelingaggrieved by the order dated 05.11.2012.
Hence, the contempt case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Dated:28.12.2012GJ
_____________________
L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J.