IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.31946 of 1997 Dated: 10.07.2007 Between: Smt.Ramani Ramchandar ..... PETITIONER AND 1.State of A.P. represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and another …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.31946 of 1997 ORDER: This writ petition is filed challenging the order in Memo No.73073/UC-II/(2)/91-6 dated 10.12.1996 passed by the 1st respondent-Government of Andhra Pradesh. By this order, the application filed by the petitioner for grant of exemption under Section 20 (1) (b) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short ‘the Act’) was rejected. The writ petitioner seeks a direction to the 1st respondent to pass an order under Section 34 of the Act for revision of the draft statement under Section 8 (4) and the final statement under Section 9 of the Act. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri C.Hanumantha Rao, submits that the order impugned in this writ petition has already been challenged by the sister of the petitioner in W.P.No.31850 of 1997 and this Court by order dated 09.04.2007 held that the impugned order was devoid of merits and accordingly it was set aside with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the application of the petitioner therein afresh after giving notice to her and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. This is not disputed by other side. Therefore, in view of the judgment referred to above, this writ petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned order in so far as it relates to the present petitioner is concerned and the 1st respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on the application of the petitioner afresh after giving notice. It is submitted by the leaned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent, Sri G.Manohar, that there are rival claimants for the land in question claiming title over the land as protected tenants. Therefore, the 1st respondent may also issue notice to them before passing orders on the application of the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ____________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 10-07-2007 Gsn.