THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G BHAVANI PRASAD W.P. No. 26552 of 2008 ORDER : (per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) The present writ petition is filed in the form of public interest litigation by one T. Harish Rao, M.L.A., seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents Nos. 1 to 4 in not finalizing the proceedings initiated for cancellation of allotments made to Respondents 5 to 10 pursuant to the orders dated 20.07.2007 passed in W.P.Nos. 9462, 9476, 9477 and 10125 of 2006 as arbitrary, unreasonable and to direct the respondents Nos. 1 to 4 to finalize the the proceedings initiated for esumption of land allotted to respondents Nos. 5 to 10 in Sy. No. 403 of Shaikpet village, road No.2, Banjarajills, Hyderabad within a period of two weeks and further to direct the respondents Nos. 5 to 10 to main status quo till finalization of proceedings by the Government. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and perused the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. Though number of grounds have been averred in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that is right from the allotment of the land in favour of unofficial respondents for construction of recording and re-recording theaters etc., in the disputed property, the petitioner filed this writ petition on the ground that the user of the property has been changed by the un-official respondents and therefore the land has to be resumed. Learned counsel further contended that though on earlier occasion, a learned single Judge of this Court in W.P. Nos. 9462, 9476, 9477 and 10125 of 2006 on 20-7-2007 has directed that it is left open to the 1st respondent therein to take necessary steps, in accordance with law, and the official respondents though initiated action against the unofficial respondents but did not finalize the same. According to the learned counsel, a show cause notice was issued on 17-02-2008 and that the unofficial respondents have submitted their explanation, but still no action is taken in finalizing the said proceedings. It is also contended by the learned counsel that the petitioner has also made a representation to the Minister for Revenue in October 2008 bringing to his notice about the orders passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in the above batch of writ petitions, but till to-day the petitioner has not received any reply on his representation and the same is pending with the Government. Under the above circumstances, without going into merits of the case, we are of the opinion that it would suffice if a direction is given to the respondent No.2 to dispose of the representation made by the petitioner, in October 2008, to the Hon’ble Minister for Revenue, as expeditiously as possible. With the above observations this writ petition is dismissed. ----------------------------- T MEENA KUMARI J ----------------------------- --- G BHAVANI PRASAD J Kvrk/ 5.3.2009 THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G BHAVANI PRASAD W.P. No. 26552 of 2008 5TH MARCH 2009