Smt.Tara Bai v. The State Of Telangana,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ***** WRIT PETITION No.19636 of 2015 Between:

Smt Tara Bai and five others ... Petitioners And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and two others.

... Respondent(s) DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 22nd July, 2015. SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments?

Yes/No Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reports/Journals Yes/No Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

Yes/No THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.19636 of 2015 ORDER:

The grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is limited to the inaction on the part of the 1st respondent in considering their representation which is pending since 2008 in Case No.28810/Assn.- II(1)/2008.

Through the said representation, the petitioners sought incorporation of their names as possessors and enjoyers of the

subject land to an extent of Ac.12.02 guntas in Sy.No.102/4/2, T.S.No.1(Part), 3(part), ward No.12, Block-J and 29(part), Ward No.9, Block-H of Hakimpet Village, Shaikpet Mandal, Hyderabad. The said representation is stated to be still pending. As early as, on 04.05.2015 petitioners filed an application seeking incorporation of their names by calling for the records from respondents 3 and 4, which are necessary for proper adjudication of their representation.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that since 2008, not even a single date of hearing has been fixed and the matter remains pending without adjudication for the last seven years. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue received instructions which speak of various litigations relating to the aforesaid land. It is further stated that in W.A.No.982 of 2002 filed against the order in W.P.No.1356 of 2001 relating to the land in question, it was observed by this Court that in view of the conflicting claims, it is appropriate that inter se disputes should be left to be decided by the competent authority and both parties should be left to initiate appropriate proceedings in this regard. The instructions further speak about various orders passed by this Court in different proceedings.

But, in any of the orders passed by this Court there does not appear to be any restraint on the 1st respondent in considering the petitioners' representation on merits and passing appropriate orders. In view of that, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to fix an early date of hearing in the aforesaid representation and after notice to parties and hearing both sides, pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as

possible, preferably within three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand dismissed.

____________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J 22nd July, 2015.

gra