Judgment :- Heard Mr.C.Lakshminarayanan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.V.Bhavani Subbarayan, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. This petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to punish the respondents for wilful disobedience of the order, dated 20.02.1998, made in W.P.No.690 of 1985. 3. It is stated that the petitioner had filed a writ petition in W.P.No.690 of 1985, praying for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to stop the excavation and building work in the lands situated in the survey numbers mentioned therein, reserved for open space and for recreational use. This Court had passed an order, dated 20.02.1998, in W.P.Nos.690 to 692 of 1985. Paragraphs 12 and 13 of the said order are as follows: 12. Government is therefore directed to have this land immediately surveyed, determine the nature of the present use and the source of the right of the persons who are now using that land, and thereafter, take appropriate steps in accordance with law for ensuring that the land is kept as open space to be developed by the Government or the Corporation as a recreational area. It is open to the Government to make suitable plans for the re-settlement of those on the land to the extent possible and to the extent required. It is however made clear that this order by itself will not have the effect of creating any right in favour of any one on the land to claim any relief by way of alternative site accommodation either from the Government or from the Corporation. 13. The 5th respondent Government Commissioner and Secretary is directed to submit a report within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order as to the steps taken by it to carry out the directions given above. Copy of this order to be communicated immediately to the Secretary, Public Works Department of the State Government as also to the Chief Secretary. Commissioner of Corporation and the Corporation of Madras shall also do all such things as are necessary to enable the Government to carry out the directions given in this order." 4. It is further submitted that in spite of the respondents receiving the order of this Court, dated 20.02.1998, the directions issued therein have not been complied with by the respondents. It is further submitted that in spite of the respondents receiving the order of this Court, dated 20.02.1998, the directions issued therein have not been complied with by the respondents. Hence, the petitioner has preferred the present contempt petition against the respondents. 5. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the encroachers in the land in question have been removed and they have been rehabilitated by providing alternative accommodation. A status report had also been filed before this Court, on 14.08.2007, a copy of which has also been served on the petitioner. Further, the learned counsel had also produced a letter dated 08.02.2008, issued by the Joint Secretary to Government Housing and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Chennai, in Letter No.42925/SC1(2)/99-62, wherein it has been stated that the encroachers in the land concerned have been evicted and the area in question has been fenced and handed over to the Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, as per the directions issued by this Court. Another letter, dated 04.02.2008, issued by the Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Housing and Slum Clearance Board, Chepauk, Chennai, to the Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, requesting the Corporation to take appropriate steps to develop the area in issue into a recreational park has also been produced before this Court. 6. Based on the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned and in view of the records placed before this Court, it is clear that the respondents have not committed contempt of Court by wilfully disobeying the order, dated 20.02.1998, made in W.P.No.690 of 1985. Hence, this contempt petition is closed.