The said contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of the order dated 01.04.2009 made in W.P.No.1780 of 2008.
2.The said writ petition has been filed seeking a direction as against the respondents to measure a particular survey number and rectify the entry in the revenue records and other registers.
3.Paragraph No.9 of the order made in W.P.No.1780 of 2008 is extracted as follows:
“9.Accordingly, the Assistant Director, District Land Survey, Virudhunagar as well as the Tahsildar, Sivakasi are hereby directed to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner on 01.03.2005 on merits and as per law with notice to the Commissioner, Sivakasi Municipality and all those persons who got interest over the property in respect of which a claim was also made by the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to produce all the documents in their possession with respect to the property before the respondents 2 and 4 so as to enable the said respondents to measure the property on the basis of such documents and revenue records.
The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order” https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/5 Cont.P(MD).No.374 of 2010
4.The allegation in Paragraph No.4 of the contempt affidavit is extracted as follows:
“4.I state that after receipt of the copy of the order I made representation to the respondents to measure and rectify the defects in the revenue records on 23.06.2009. The respondents even after the receipt of the order of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.1780 of 2008 have not taken steps to measure the property and dispose of the representation of the petitioner, which is in violation of the order of this Hon'ble Court. Hence, the petitioner again made representation to the respondents on 07.12.2009 and to the second respondent on 20.02.2010. Even then the respondents are not taking steps to dispose the representation of the petitioner as per the order of this Hon'ble Court in W.P(MD).No.1780 of 2008”
5.From the allegation in the contempt affidavit, it could be seen that even after the receipt of the High Court order, the respondents 2 and 4, in the writ petition have not taken any steps to measure the property. The said contempt petition has been filed on 29.04.2010.
6.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the contemnors has filed a typed set of papers which indicate that the second contemnor namely Tahsildhar, Sivakasi has already surveyed the land as per directions of this Court and has filed a report on 19.08.2009. The said report has been sent by a registered post to the writ petitioner and he has received https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/5 Cont.P(MD).No.374 of 2010 the same on 30.10.2009. However, the present contempt petition has been filed on 30.04.2010 alleging violation of the orders of this Court. It is not the case of the contempt petitioner that the survey was not conducted in the manner as directed by this Court. The complaint of the contempt petitioner is that the survey was not at all conducted as per the order of this Court. The report of the Tashildar dated 19.08.2010 clearly divulges that in fact the survey has been conducted and the same has been served upon the contempt petitioner on 30.10.2009.
7.In view of the above said facts, I find that there is no violation of the order of this Court and the contempt petition stands dismissed.
17.08.2022 Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No msa To
1.S.Mathavan The Assistant Director Office of the District Land Survey Virudhungar
2.I.Johnson The Tahsildar Sivakasi Virudhunagar District https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/5 Cont.P(MD).No.374 of 2010 R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.
msa Pre-delivery order made in Cont.Petition (MD).No.374 of 2010 17.08.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/5