IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN Present HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.14224 of 2014 Between:
Smt. Fatimunnisa Begum, W/o. Late M.A. Rahman Khan, Aged about 67 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. H.No.16-2-838, Baquer Bagh, Saidabad, Hyderabad & 7 others .. Petitioners AND Under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Enemy Property Section, Jaisalmer House, Mansingh Road, New Delhi – 100 001 & 5 others AND WRIT PETITION No.16180 of 2014 .. Respondents Between:
Smt. Fatimunnisa Begum, W/o. Late M.A. Rahman Khan, Aged about 67 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. H.No.16-2-838, Baquer Bagh, Saidabad, Hyderabad & 7 others .. Petitioners AND The Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Enemy Property Section, Jaisalmer House, Mansingh Road, New Delhi – 100 001, Rep. by its Secretary & 6 others The Court made the following:
.. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.14224 & 16180 of 2014 COMMON ORDER:
These writ petitions are filed seeking the following reliefs:
W.P.No.14224 of 2014:
To declare the action of respondents 1 and 2 in not deleting the land in Survey No.28, to an extent of Ac. 145.00 cents, situated at Miyapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal, R.R. District, from the purview of custodian of Enemy Properties as illegal, arbitrary, and in consequence thereof further direct the respondents to delete the subject land from the purview of custodian of Enemy properties and hand over the same to the petitioners herein.
W.P.No.16180 of 2014:
To call for the records relating to the proceedings No.12/06/2006-E.P., dated 09.07.2008, read with proceedings No.12/06/2006-E.P., dated 15.09.2009, of the 1st respondent and declare the same as illegal and arbitrary and contrary and violative of principles of natural justice and in consequence thereof to set aside the same and further direct the respondents to declare that the petitioners are the legal heirs of the original owners in Survey Nos.20 and 28, Miyapur Village, Srilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Andhra Pradesh, as per the Letter No.B/260/2012, dated 27.06.2012, of the 4th respondent and also Letter No.ROC No.A1/2154/2012, dated 15.09.2012, of the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Record of Ranga Reddy District.
2. By an order, dated 29.04.2014, in W.P.No.14224 of 2014, this Court passed the following interim order:
“Notice before admission, returnable in four weeks.
Post after four weeks.
Petitioners claim to have been submitted an application on 27-11-2012 to the 1st respondent seeking directions to the custodian of Enemy Properties to take up the matter on priority basis and do the needful for the deletion of the property in Sy.No.28 to an extent of Ac.145.00 situated at Miyapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Petitioners claim that the application is yet to be disposed of, even though 1 ½ year is passed.
There shall be interim direction, directing the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the application submitted by the petitioners as warranted by law within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and communicate the decision to the petitioners.”
3. In pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court in W.P.No.14224 of 2014, dated 29.04.2014, the competent authority passed orders in File No.12/6/2006-EP, dated 22.07.2014, rejecting the application filed by the petitioners, dated 27.11.2012. On the same day, Order in File No.12/6/2006-EP (Part-IV), dated 22.07.2014, is passed, whereby the earlier order, dated 09.07.2008, was withdrawn and the property in issue is held to be an enemy property by the Custodian and remained with the Custodian of Enemy Property. These orders are not under challenge. Thus, in view of the order passed on 22.07.2014, the cause in the writ petitions does not survive. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the orders passed on 22.07.2014, the petitioners have to work out their remedies as available under law.
4. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are dismissed giving liberty to the petitioners to work out their remedies as available under law. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date: 6th August, 2014 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.14224 & 16180 of 2014 Date: 6th August, 2014 KL