Bheemanaboina Saidamma v. The State Of Telangana

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO Between:

Bheemanaboina Saidamma, w/o. Saidulu, Aged 36 years, occu: Agriculture daily wages coolie, r/o. Kudakuda village, Chivemla Mandal, Nalgonda district and two others.

.....Petitioners and The State of Telangana, rep.by its Prl.Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.

.....Respondents The Court made the following:

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO ORDER:

On 10.02.2017, orders were issued by the District Collector, Suryapet, directing the Revenue Divisional Officer, Suryapet and the Tahsildar, Chivemla to take action for eviction of unauthorized encroachments in Waqf land in Sy.No.1 to an extent of Ac.0.20 guntas in Kuda Kuda village of Chivemla Mandal by following due process of law and to take action to incorporate the same in the revenue records. This order was challenged in W.P.No.25569 of 2017 by the petitioners. This Court by order dated 02.08.2017, while adjourning the matter at the request of the learned Government Pleader, granted interim suspension as prayed for to limited period, stated to have been extended later. The said writ petition is pending consideration. This Writ Petition is filed praying to direct the respondent no.

4 to enter or maintain the revenue records as earlier/prior to the orders in proceedings dated 10.02.2017. The said prayer is based on the interim order granted by this Court in the above writ petition. Petitioners earlier filed C.C.No.3427 of 2018 alleging violation of directions of this Court in W.P.No.25569 of 2017, contending that request of petitioners to mutate their names in the revenue records are not entered even though order dated 10.02.2017 was suspended. Having regard to the interim order passed, Contempt Case was closed holding that it cannot be said that respondents have violated the directions of the Court.

2.

The validity of the order dated 10.02.2017 requires consideration in W.P.No.25569 of 2017. The suspension of said order stopped taking further action against petitioners. Petitioners now seek restoration of position prevailing prior to that order as if order is set

aside. No such directions can be issued even before earlier writ petition is decided. This is nothing but multiplying litigation on the same issue. This Court is loath to encourage such kind of litigation. Thus, leaving it open to petitioners to work out their remedies as available in law and/or to prosecute the pending writ petition, this Writ Petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed.

___________________________ JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO kkm

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO kkm