IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR AND THE HON’BLR SRI JUSTICE T. SUNIL CHOWDARY CONTEMPT CASE No.1377 of 2013 BETWEEN Sudheer Bhandari.
…PETITIONER AND G. Vikramsimha Reddy and another.
…RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. SRINIVAS REDDY BALAKISTI Counsel for the Respondent: MR. P. RAGHAVENDRA REDDY The Court made the following order:
ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar) The first respondent is present in the Court and counter affidavit is filed on his behalf.
2. Second respondent though served, nobody appears nor the person is present personally. So far as second respondent is concerned, bailable warrant has to go for ensuring his appearance. However, in view of the subsequent developments, we are not adopting to such course in the present case.
3. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent, who is Municipal Commissioner, states in para 5 as follows:
“5. In reply to Para 3 and 4 of the contempt case I submit that as stated supra the demolition of encroachment portion is took place on 2.2.2013 itself ie., before passing the orders by this Hon’ble Court in PIL No.409/2012. It is not true to say that with the collusion of the first respondent with the 2nd respondent there is no removal of encroachment portion. I submit that on 2.3.2013 itself the demolition took place. As stated in my counter affidavit, in fact the 2nd respondent herein encroached 1 ft x 30 ft government land and after noticing the same the municipality has demolished the encroached portion on 2.2.2013.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that apart from the said demolition, referred to in the counter affidavit, as extracted above, all the objectionable constructions are already demolished and that the petitioner has no more subsisting grievance in the matter.
In view of that, therefore, the contempt case is dismissed.
The miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J T. SUNIL CHOWDARY, J August 14, 2014 DSK