ORDER : The petitioner has filed this application, seeking clarification of the order passed in Contempt Petition (MD) No. 707 of 2016 in W.P. (MD) No. 14324 of 2013, dated 24.11.2016. 2. Heard Mr. T. Lenin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. C. Vakeeswaran, learned counsel for the 1st respondent and Mr. Murugan, learned Government Advocate for respondents 2 to 4 and perused the materials available on record. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the lands of the petitioner, in various survey numbers, were acquired by the respondents in the year 2012 and pursuant to the acquisition proceedings, they have been taken possession from the petitioner. Due to non-payment of compensation, the Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.14324 of 2013 was filed. 4. It is further submitted that on 18.09.2015, based on the submission of the counsel for the first respondent that the representation of the petitioner will be considered, on merits and compensation will be paid, this court directed the second and third respondents to forward the petitioner's representation to the first respondent and he was also directed to consider the representation on merits and pay compensation, if any to the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit the due to non-compliance of the order, the above contempt petition was filed and during the pendency of the contempt petition, the first respondent deposited a sum of Rs.2,08,493/- to the 2nd respondent towards interim compensation. In view of the above fact, the contempt petition was closed, directing the second respondent to deposit the said amount, in any one of the Nationalized Bank. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the petitioner is entitled to get interim compensation, since the property of the petitioner was taken away in the year 2012 and therefore, the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the amount. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent, on instructions, submitted that though the land acquisition proceedings have been initiated in the year 2001 and the possession was taken over by the first respondent Southern railway, but, so far no interim award, neither in favour of the petitioner nor in favour of the land owner was determined. However, to avoid contempt proceedings, the amount was deposited to the second respondent. 8. However, to avoid contempt proceedings, the amount was deposited to the second respondent. 8. It is not in dispute that the petitioner's lands were acquired by the respondents and possession was taken in the year 2012. However, unfortunately even after a lapse of five years, admittedly, the compensation was not paid. 9. In view of the above facts, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled to withdraw the amount. Therefore, the second respondent is directed to disburse the amount of Rs.2,08,493/- along with accrued interest to the petitioner, forthwith. 10. This application is ordered accordingly. No costs.