THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.18279 of 2010 Date: 10.10.2011 Between: G.Jaganmohan Rao and 15 others. ..... Petitioners AND The Govt of A.P., Reptd., by its Secretary, Irrigation Department, Hyderabad and three others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri V.V.Satish For Sri O.Manoher Reddy Counsel for Respondent No.1: AGP for Irrigation and CAD Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 to 4: GP for Land Acquisition The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent Nos.1 to 3 in providing benefits of Resettlement and Rehabilitation Scheme (for short ‘R & R Scheme’) in terms of G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD Department, dated 08.04.2005, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners sought for a consequential direction to respondent Nos.1 to 3 to provide the benefits under the R & R Scheme. The properties of the petitioners were acquired for construction of B.R.R.(Vamshadhara) Project Hiramandalam Reservoir. The above-mentioned G.O. provides for resettlement and rehabilitation of displaced families under the irrigation projects in addition to payment of compensation. The grievance of the petitioners is that the R & R Scheme is not being implemented. Even though no counter-affidavit is filed by the respondents, learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4, submitted that the respondents have initiated the R & R Scheme in right earnest by acquiring about Ac.49.89 cents of land and that, some of the owners of the said land have filed Writ Petition No.12764 of 2008 and secured an interim order from this Court disabling the respondents from implementing the R & R Scheme. Learned Government Pleader further submitted that petitioner Nos.1, 5, 7, 10, 11 and 14 herein have, in fact, got impleaded in the said Writ Petition and also filed vacate stay application, which is pending. In my opinion, the interim order granted by this Court in the said Writ Petition has the result of preventing the respondents from implementing the R & R Scheme and therefore, they cannot be found fault with for not going ahead with the R & R Scheme. As some of the petitioners are also parties to the above-mentioned Writ Petition filed questioning the acquisition of lands for implementation of the R & R Scheme, they shall be free to contest the said Writ Petition and ensure that appropriate order therein is passed. So long as the said Writ Petition is pending and interim order subsists, no relief can be granted in this Writ Petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to resume the R & R Scheme, subject to the result of Writ Petition No.12764 of 2008. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.23079 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. __________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 10th October 2011 DR