The present contempt petition has been preferred by the petitioner to punish the respondents for having committed contempt of Court by wilfully disobeying the order passed by this Court dated 16.12.2014 in Writ Petition No.33080 of 2014.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the order of this Court has been complied with by restoring the water service connection.
3.On the contrary, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the order passed by this Court has not been complied with.
4.Considering the rival submissions made by both sides, it is seen that admittedly, the petitioner is living in the city but is claiming to be residing in the village also. Further, it is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that it is not the business of the local body to find out for what purpose the water is used i.e., whether it is used for drinking purpose or cultivation purpose.
5.It is evident from the above argument advanced by the petitioner that the water is being used for cultivation purpose. Hence, the present contempt petition cannot be entertained and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the contempt petition stands dismissed. Connected Sub-Application is also closed.
06.04.2017 pgp N. KIRUBAKARAN, J.
pgp Cont.P.No.402 of 2015 Dated : 06.04.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in