G.Bhuma Goucl, v. The State Of Telangana,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT W.P. No.17010 of 2018 ORDER:

The petitioners challenge notice No.B/65/2018 dated 09.04.2018 as illegal, without jurisdiction and unconstitutional.

Mr.P.Ananth Nageswar Rao, after arguing the matter for some time particularly, keeping in view, the objections the petitioners propose to raise, expresses the apprehension that even if all the circumstances are placed before the 3rd respondent, the 3rd respondent may give importance to the direction issued by the District Collector, ignore to consider them which may result in injustice to petitioners. He further contends that the petitioners as a matter of fact, are entitled for grant of assignment of Government land and no ground is made out for canceling the assignment already made; if the 3rd respondent objectively considers, the petitioners are prepared to file explanation and thereafter the petitioners if are aggrieved would work out remedies in accordance with law.

The contentions raised by the petitioners are adverted to, for one of the sentences in the notice suggests that the 3rd respondent is discharging the direction issued by 2nd respondent. To meet the ends of

justice and to give fair and reasonable opportunity to petitioners, in the enquiry pending before the 3rd respondent, the writ petition is disposed of by this order: (a) The petitioners are given four weeks time from today to submit explanation to notice dated 09.04.2018 by enclosing a copy of this order. (b) The 3rd respondent independently examines the record and passes orders as are deemed fit as expeditiously as possible preferably within two (02) months thereafter.

(c) The parties are directed to maintain status-quo as regards possession and physical features, till the orders are passed and communicated. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ S. V. BHATT, J Dt: 04.06.2018 dv