IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.22236 of 2014 BETWEEN Mulla Abdulla Sab and others.
AND ... PETITIONERS The State of A.P., Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. KASA JAGANMOHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Petitioners question the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Adoni in M.C.No.13 of 2011 dated 10.10.2011, which itself states that the order was passed to prevent breach of public peace and tranquility. The said order has remained in force for more than three years.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are not permitted to cultivate their own land in spite of orders passed by this Court in WPMP.No.6221 of 2013 in WVMP.No.3954 of 2012 in WP.No.33042 of 2012 dated 22.04.2014 wherein this Court had vacated the earlier interim order and according to the learned counsel, the right of the petitioners stands recognized thereby.
Learned counsel, therefore, submits that by virtue of the aforesaid orders of this Court, the order passed by the Joint Collector, Kunool in File No.D5.2982/2010 dated 27.09.2012 stand upheld pending disposal of the writ petition. A mandamus, therefore, is sought to permit the petitioners to continue with the agricultural operations in the said land, unaffected by the order impugned dated 10.10.2011, referred to above.
3. In my view, the petitioners have approached this Court challenging the impugned order after long lapse of time and even otherwise the said order in M.C.No.13 of 2011was passed on the basis of the circumstances then appearing, which were taken into consideration by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. As there are subsequent events including the orders passed by the Joint Collector as well as by this Court, referred to above, it is open for the petitioners to approach the second respondent and request him to revise the said earlier order in M.C.No.13 of 2011 dated 10.10.2011 in the light of the changed circumstances and seek appropriate relief. From the record, it does not appear that there is any order passed restricting the petitioners from cultivating the land and as such, the petitioners are also at liberty to raise the aforesaid grievance, by way of an application, before the Sub- Divisional Magistrate, who shall take the application of the petitioners into consideration and pass appropriate orders expeditiously.
The writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
August 6, 2014 VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Note: Furnish C.C. of the order by 08.08.2014.
(B/o) DSK