B Narsimlu v. Prl.Secy., Revenue Dept., Hyd., And 5 Others,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT WRIT PETITION No.17031 OF 2017 ORDER:

Mr. S.Surender Reddy, counsel for petitioner, after arguing the writ petition for considerable length of time, concedes that the prayer is substantially founded on apprehension and the possession of the subject premises at Adilabad is in the custody of Revenue Divisional Officer/Tahsildar and the petitioner may be given opportunity to raise all objections in the pending matter before Revenue Divisional Officer who is likely to take a decision to hand over the subject premises to 6th respondent. In the considered view of this Court, the writ petition is filed on apprehension. The petitioner, if, has reason to believe that the 4th respondent is likely to act in the matter, ought to have filed a representation together with supporting documents in opposition of any of the requests made by 6th respondent. The 4th respondent, if passes an order, then the petitioner has cause of action to challenge the proceedings before this Court or any other Forum.

By giving liberty to petitioner to represent to 4th respondent as indicated above, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, filed in this Writ Petition shall stand dismissed.

____________________ JUSTICE S.V. BHATT Date:13.12.2017 KPM