IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 23854 of 2003 Between: Smt. I. Savithri w/o K.V.N. Suri Babu R/o flat No. 504, Annapurna Residency, Vivekananda Colony, Mehidipatnam, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND The Competent Authority (Under AP Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act), Additional Director General of Police, CID, Govt of Andhra Pradesh (Police Department) Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or other appropriate order or direction in the nature of a Writ of declaring the Memo No. 6555/C24/CID/2002 dt 23-10-2003 as arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of articles 14 and 300 A of the constitution of India and ultravires A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act and consequently to restrain the respondent from giving effect to the same in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.NALIN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 23854 of 2003 O R D E R : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the notice dated 23-10-2003 issued by the respondent-competent authority under the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 (Additional Director General of Police CID, A.P., Hyderabad) directing the petitioner to deposit the monthly rent in respect of ground floor bearing No.394, Manikonda village in the Court of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally, is arbitrary and illegal. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties. As could be seen from the material on record, the property in question possessed by the petitioner herein as a tenant was attached under Section 3 of A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999. Pursuant thereto, an ad-interim order of attachment was passed and an application was made before the Court of Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad to issue absolute orders in respect of the said property. Pending such proceedings, the impugned notice was issued by the respondent directing the petitioner to deposit the monthly rent payable in respect of the said promises into the Court of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally. This Court, while directing Rule Nisi, by order dated 25-11-2003 in W.P.No.29966 of 2003 granted interim suspension of the impugned notice in so far as depositing the rents by the petitioner before the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally is concerned making it clear that the other proceedings before the Court may go on. When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner under instructions submitted that Crl.M.P.No.736 of 2002 is still pending in the Court of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. Having regard to the fact that the interim order dated 25-11-2003 granted by this Court has been in operation although, without going into the merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to dispose of Crl.M.P.No.736 of 2002 in accordance with law expeditiously. Till such disposal, the interim suspension granted by this Court dated 25- 11-2003 to the extent of depositing the rents into Court shall continue. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Dated:02-03-2009 KLP