Judgment Heard. 2. The present petition has been filed under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act read with section 215 of the Indian Constitution alleging disobedience of the directions contemplated in the order dated 29/6/09 issued in public interest in W.P.No.625/02 in between parties Hardas Gupta and others Vs. State of M.P. & others. In the order dated 29/6/09 following directions were issued in operative para, which being germane to the point under consideration, may be quoted below:- “Having heard the parties, we find that there is no dispute about the factual situation. Even counsel for the Electricity Board and Telephone Department could not dispute that their polls are on the roads. According to them, those polls can be removed only if the Municipal Corporation makes arrangements for the funds. The question of finance can be considered even at subsequent stage. We also find that there are already orders of this Court dated 22/1/2008 that the Electricity Board should first remove the polls and then may raise demand from the Municipal Corporation towards the expenditure. However, still, no action is taken by the officers of the Electricity Board. Similar is the situation with the Telephone (Gaurav Pandey Vs. Santosh Kumar Singh & others) Department. There is also no dispute that the persons who were removed in encroachment drive in the light of the orders passed by this Court in the case of M.M.Kaushik (supra) have again encroached upon the streets and footpath and doing their business. In such circumstances, we direct:- (1) The Authorities of the State Government and the Municipal Corporation, Gwalior should strictly follow the directions issued by this Court in the case of M.M.Kaushik (supra) within a month from today. (2) The Municipal Corporation, Gwalior shall level all the main holes in the area and bring it to the level of the roads within a month from today. (3) Superintendent of Police, Gwalior and Superintendent of Police (Traffic) Gwalior should see that appropriate help is provided to the Municipal Corporation in removal of encroachment. We also direct them to see that there shall not be any encroachment in the area and if any encroachment is found, then hold the concerning Traffic In charge and the Station Officer of the concerning police station responsible for the same. We also direct them to see that there shall not be any encroachment in the area and if any encroachment is found, then hold the concerning Traffic In charge and the Station Officer of the concerning police station responsible for the same. The Ward Officers of the concerning wards shall also be held personally responsible if they do not report about the encroachment in future. The Municipal Corporation shall also see that there is no traffic congestion due to the encroachments or any other reason whatsoever. (4) The Municipal Corporation shall also remove all the structures including the stairs and ramps which are constructed on the footpath of the roads within one month from today. (5) The Municipal Corporation shall also take steps for repairs of drains and maintain good quality of roads in the area. (6) The Municipal Magistrate appointed at Gwalior shall also look into the matter and visit the circulating area of Maharaj Bada and Maharaj Bada at least once a week. If he finds any encroachment, he may take legal action against the same. (7) If there is any obstruction by any political person against removal of encroachments, then the Municipal Magistrate and the Authorities of the State Government and Municipal Corporation shall take appropriate legal steps against such political persons. (8) The Electricity Board and the Department of Telecommunication shall positively remove their polls which are either on the roads or creating obstruction in the free flow of traffic within a period of one month from today. Compliance report be positively filed by the respondents within one month from today. If this Court finds that directions issued by this Court in the present case as also in the case of M.M.Kaushik (supra) are not followed by the authorities, then they shall be liable for contempt of this Court. List this petition on 11th of August, 2009.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that despite issuing such directions so long back, no positive action has been taken by the authority to check the obstructions created in the free flow of the traffic. It is submitted by the counsel that due to making unauthorised parking by permanently placing handcarts etc. no encroachment was removed. Hence, by filing the instant petition, it is prayed that appropriate directions be issued against the responsible authorities and they be suitably punished for flouting the directions of this court. It is submitted by the counsel that due to making unauthorised parking by permanently placing handcarts etc. no encroachment was removed. Hence, by filing the instant petition, it is prayed that appropriate directions be issued against the responsible authorities and they be suitably punished for flouting the directions of this court. On the other hand, Shri Raghuvanshi by submitting the return/reply to the contempt petition on behalf of contemner/respondent No.2, pleaded that in the said writ petition, the present petitioner was not a party to the proceedings inasmuch as no such order was passed in his favour. Hence, he has no locus standi to initiate contempt proceedings. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that in pursuance to the directions issued under public interest, the competent authority took up the matter in their hands and by deputing personnels, every attempt has been made to remove the encroachment. It is submitted that by making drive the electric polls and transformers which are coming and causing obstructions in free flow of the traffic, have been removed so that the traffic on the road may not be congested and goes smoothly. Hence, it is prayed that the present petition which is filed on the basis of reckless allegations and wrong facts is liable to be dismissed with costs and the contemners are liable to discharged. 4. Having regard to the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the parties, entire record of the case has been perused. 5. As per the facts culled out and the material available on record, the instant case appears to be filed by the person who is neither party to the writ petition nor any such order has been passed in his favour and therefore petitioner has no locus standi. 6. Otherwise also, because impugned order was passed in W.P.No.625/02 (PIL), therefore we have to see whether order of the court has been complied with or not. 7. On perusal of the return filed on behalf of the respondent No.2, it is explicit that the concerned authorities are taking every possible steps to remove the encroachment. However, in order to safeguard the public interest, we deem it proper to direct that the State and its authorities shall file status report in the pending W.P.No.625/02 to show their action taken so far pursuant to the directions of this court. With this direction, the petition stands disposed of.