ORDER : M.V. Muralidaran, J. The petitioner has filed this contempt petition to punish the respondent herein for the willful disobedience of the order passed by this Hon’ble Court made in W.P. (MD) No. 1741 of 2017 dated 08.02.2017 under the Contempt of Courts Act. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she owns a house property in Survey number S. No. 1032/2B1F at Perumalthevanpatti Village, Pillaiyarkulam Revenue Village of Srivilliputtur Taluk. On the eastern side of the petitioner’s house, the house of one Srirengammal bearing Door No.281/2 is situated in S.No.1030/1B. In between the house of the petitioner and the house of the Srirengammal an Odai is running in S.No.1030 which is a Odai, Pattai land viz used as Common Foot pathway and only through the same, the petitioner is accessing to her house. Being so, at the instigation of the said Srirengammal through her son Rama Shanmugam, who is working as Ortho Doctor at New Delhi in Parliament House Hospital, earlier the 2nd respondent herein measured the land of the petitioner in her absence, without issuing any prior notice and alleged that there is an encroachment made by the petitioner also issued a notice dated 06-01-17 in Na.Ka.P1/54/2017 as if the petitioner has encroached upon a portion of pathway. 3. The said Notice came to be challenged before this court in W.P(MD)No.1741 of 2017 and the notice of the 2nd respondent was set-aside on the ground of Violation of principles of Natural Justice by order dated 08.02.2017. Further this court vide paras 9 of the order, strictly directed the 1st respondent to conduct proper survey in the presence of the petitioner in respect of Survey Nos.1031 and 1032/2B1F and if there is any encroachment in Survey No.1031, directed to take appropriate action against all the encroachers under due process of law within a period of two months. 4. Having got knowledge about the said order and despite the specific direction issued by this Hon’ble Court to conduct survey of the above survey numbers in the presence of the petitioner, the 1st respondent deliberately passed an ante dated order on 03-04-2017 with a direction to the petitioner to remove the steps of her house within ten days from the date of receipt of the order as if the petitioner has encroached upon the public pathway. 5. 5. Since the said order was made without any Survey, immediately on 08.05.2017, the petitioner sent a contempt notice to the 1st respondent herein. Despite the receipt of contempt notice, the respondents 1st respondent herein along with the VAO, Revenue Inspector and the police personnel on 13.05.2017 all of a sudden has illegally demolished the steps of the petitioner’s house using JCB vehicle. Without conducting a survey as directed by this court, the respondent herein solely with a view to favour the said Rama Shanmugam, who is working as Ortho Doctor at New Delhi in Parliament House Hospital, has involved in such an illegal act. The above act of the respondents is a clear case of contempt and therefore, the petitioner prays to punish the respondents for their willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court, dated 08.02.2017. 6. Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondents. 7. It is seen from the records that the petitioner has challenged the order of the 1st respondent dated 06.01.2017 in W.P(MD)No.1741 of 2017 before this Court. This Court, by an order dated 08.02.2017 set aside the impugned order and directed the 1st respondent to conduct proper survey in the presence of the petitioner in respect of Survey Nos.1031 and 1032/2B1F and if there is any encroachment in Survey No.1031, directed to take appropriate action against all the encroachers under due process of law within a period of two months. It is further seen from the records that on receipt of the above said order, the petitioner has sent a detailed representation to the respondents herein on 13.2.17 by RPAD along with the copy of order passed in the said writ petition with a specific plea that one Sri Rengammal has encroached into the public pathway and therefore to conduct proper survey and to remove all the encroachments as directed by the Division Bench of this Court. The respondents have received the said representation of the petitioner. 8. It reveals from records that thereafter, the 1st respondent has not conducted survey as directed by this court, on the other hand, passed order to remove the alleged encroachment by the petitioner by putting date as 03-04-17, but admittedly it was sent to the petitioner by registered post on 05-05-17 only and it was received by the petitioner on 06-05-17. It reveals from records that thereafter, the 1st respondent has not conducted survey as directed by this court, on the other hand, passed order to remove the alleged encroachment by the petitioner by putting date as 03-04-17, but admittedly it was sent to the petitioner by registered post on 05-05-17 only and it was received by the petitioner on 06-05-17. At this juncture, when this Court put a question as to why the communication was sent a month later by post, the respondents replied that since they were observing Strike for all those days, the communication remained unsent in their office. Such an evasive reply given by the respondents is unfair and inacceptable. Further the petitioner immediately on receipt of the said order, on 08.05.2017 sent a contempt notice to the 1st respondent herein through her advocate by RPAD and the same was duly received by him. In the said order the 1st respondent has given 10 days time to the petitioner to remove the alleged encroachment. The 10 days time expire only on 16.05.2017. But even before the expiry of the time stipulated in the said order, and despite the receipt of contempt notice, the respondents 1 & 2 demolished the steps of the petitioner’s house. The above said act of the respondents shows that their conduct is not good and they have acted in gross violation of the order passed by this court. 9. On 17.05.2017 when this contempt petition was came up for admission and upon hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and after perusing the records and having convinced with the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that if at all any demolition is done without surveying the field, despite of the specific direction by this court in this regard, it amounts to willful contempt of this court, this court suo moto impleaded the Tashildar as the 2nd respondent in this contempt petition. Thereby both the respondents were directed to appear before this court on 18.05.2015 with all records pertaining to the case on hand. As directed by us, the respondents 1 and 2 herein were present before this court. After enquiring as to whether there was a notice or survey conducted in the field as directed by this court before their act of demolishing the petitioner’s steps. As directed by us, the respondents 1 and 2 herein were present before this court. After enquiring as to whether there was a notice or survey conducted in the field as directed by this court before their act of demolishing the petitioner’s steps. But there was not even a single piece of paper exhibited by the respondents to show that they have conducted a survey in consonance with the order of this court. Therefore this court comes to the conclusion that there is deliberate violation of order made by this court. 10. Further this court on taking into account of the fact that earlier too, the respondents passed one such bare order of demolition without even noticing the petitioner and the same was set aside by this court directing to conduct a proper survey, now again the respondents has committed a repetition of such act negative by this Court. Thus this court is of the opinion that there is a Willful violation of the order of this court by the respondents. 11. When this court expressed its displeasure towards the act of the respondents, the respondents pleaded and undertook to construct a sand bund structure enabling the petitioner to have ingress and egress into her house. Taking into account of the undertaking made by the respondents, though this court affirms that such conduct of the respondents are not at all entertainable/acceptable, but this Court takes a lenient view in the light of the undertaking made by the respondents to restore the steps of the petitioner’s house to its original position. 12. For the foregoing discussion above, we are of the considered opinion to dispose of the contempt petition with the following direction. 13. In the result,- i. The respondents are strictly directed to restore the demolished area of the petitioner’s steps using sand bund immediately within a period of one week from the date of receipt of this Order copy, in case of non compliance of this direction, it is open to the petitioner to initiate a contempt proceeding afresh. ii. The respondents are further directed to conduct a field survey after due notice to the petitioner herein and to conduct survey in the presence of the petitioner. iii. The respondents are further directed to strictly comply with the order of this court by conducting a field survey with respect of S. Nos. ii. The respondents are further directed to conduct a field survey after due notice to the petitioner herein and to conduct survey in the presence of the petitioner. iii. The respondents are further directed to strictly comply with the order of this court by conducting a field survey with respect of S. Nos. 1031 & 1032/2B1F and if any encroachments found, the respondents shall remove all the encroachments under due process of Law. iv. The respondents shall strictly adhere with the direction given by this court in W.P. No. 1741 of 2017 dated 08.02.2017. v. The petitioner is directed to cooperate with the respondents.