IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.23577 of 2014 BETWEEN Potharajula Lachaiah AND ... PETITIONERS The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department of Revenue), A.P. Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is that in spite of directions of this court in W.P.No.8496 of 20914, dated 24.04.2014, the appeal preferred by respondent No.6 is not yet disposed of by respondent No.3 herein. By the aforesaid order, it was directed as follows:
“In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to direct the second respondent to hear and dispose of the appeal or application for stay filed by the petitioner expeditiously and in any case before 15.06.2014 and till then, the order of the third respondent impugned in the said appeal shall remain stayed.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the interim stay directed by this court was operative only till 15.06.2014 and since the appeal was not disposed of, it was obligatory on the part of respondent Nos.3 and 4, to implement the orders of respondent No.4, dated 11.02.2014. Learned counsel submits that the memo, accordingly, was issued on 03.03.2014 by respondent No.5 directing to take over the possession of the land in order to restore it to the petitioner. However, subsequent thereto no steps are taken. Hence, the present writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus against respondent No.5 to ensure compliance of the orders of eviction and restoration of possession to the petitioner in pursuance of the memo aforesaid.
4. Learned Government Pleader was required to get instructions as to whether the orders of this court in the writ petition, referred to above, are complied with or not. Learned Government Pleader has now received instructions, which show that the appeal was not heard by the Additional Agent on account of the General elections and later the Project Officer and Additional Agent to the Government had gone on long leave from June, 2014 onwards and in-charge arrangement was made by the District Collector giving full additional charge to the Project Officer i.e., the Sub-Collector, Asifabad since 07.06.2014.
The aforesaid appeal is stated to have been heard by him on 16.08.2014 and 30.08.2014 and the case was fixed for hearing to 20.09.2014.
5. In view of the instructions of the learned Government Pleader, as noted above, since the period fixed for disposal of the appeal by order of this court has already expired, it would be just and appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing respondent No.3 to hear and dispose of the said appeal, on merits, after hearing the parties, either on 20.09.2014 or in any case by the end of September, 2014, in accordance with law.
With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J July 14, 2014 LMV