IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 13878 of 2008 Between: 1 Nallela Satyanarayana, S/o. late Narsaiah Hindu, R/o. H.No. 7-5-49, East Kapuwada, Hanamkonda, Warangal. 2 Nallela Usha Rani, W/o. Lakshminarayana, Hindu, R/o. H.No. 7-5-49, East Kapuwada, Hanamkonda, Warangal. Rep. by their G.P.A Holder Sri Nallela Satyanarayana, i.e., 1st Petitioner herein) 3 Nallela Ramakrishnaiah, S/o. late Narsaiah, Hindu, R/o. H.No. 7-5-49, East Kapuwada, Hanamkonda, Warangal. Rep. by their G.P.A Holder Sri Nallela Satyanarayana, i.e., 1st Petitioner herein) 4 Milukula Sulochana, W/o. Kumara Swamy, Hindu, R/o. H.No. 7-5-49, East Kapuwada, Hanamkonda, Warangal. Rep. by their G.P.A Holder Sri Nallela Satyanarayana, i.e., 1st Petitioner herein) 5 Nallela Saraswathi, W/o. Sudhakar, Hindu, R/o. H.No. 7-5-49, East Kapuwada, Hanamkonda, Warangal. Rep. by their G.P.A Holder Sri Nallela Satyanarayana, i.e., 1st Petitioner herein) ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Special Tribunal under Land Grabbing (Prohibition), Act, the Court of District Judge, Warangal. 2 Thailam Venakteswarlu, S/o. Venakatadri, Hindu, Sagara Veedhi, Near Chourasta, Hanamkonda, Warangal district. 3 Thailam Venugopalaswamy, S/o. Yadagiri, Hindu, Budhabhavan, Sagara Veedhi, Near Chowrasta, Hanamkonda, Warangal District. 4 Nallela Surender, S/o. Venkata Badraiah, Hindu, Behind Raja Narendra Library, Hanamkonda, Warangal District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a Writ order or direction more one in the nature fo Writ of Certiorari, calling for records pertaining to I.A.No. 7/2006in LGC No. 14 of 1997 on the file of the learned 1st respondent Court and restore the LGC No. 14 of 1997 by quash the dismissal orders dated 10-3-2008 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.J.VENKATESWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU Writ Petition No.13878 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is filed seeking to quash the order dated 10-3-2008 in I.A.No.7 of 2006 in L.G.C.No.14 of 1997 on the file of Special Tribunal under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act. 2. The petitioners 2 to 5 represented by their GPA-holder, first petitioner herein, filed I.A.No.7 of 2006 in the above LGC seeking to condone the delay of 66 days in filing the petition for restoration of I.A.No.88 of 2002, which was dismissed for default on 18-10-2005 as there was no representation. The reason stated for the delay caused was that the counsel had not informed about the status of the case. The contesting respondents resisted the I.A. contending that the LGC is of the year 1997 and the matter was coming up for enquiry and posted finally on 19-9-2002 and when there was no representation, the Tribunal rightly dismissed I.A. The Tribunal after considering the rival contentions, held that the present IA is filed to protract the proceedings and the reason is an invented one, and accordingly dismissed I.A. Hence, this writ petition. 3 . Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as contesting respondents and perused the record. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the Special Tribunal ought to have condoned the delay as the petitioners were not aware of the status of the case. On the other hand, learned counsel for contesting respondents supported the impugned order. 5. It is seen from the record that L.G.C. was dismissed for default 19-9-2002 as there was no representation and I.A.No.88 of 2002 was filed seeking restoration, which was also dismissed for default on 18-10-2005 due to non-appearance. The present I.A. was filed seeking restoration of I.A.No.88 of 2002. Since substantial rights of the parties are involved, in this case, and the first petitioner is representing all the other petitioners, we deem it just and proper to give final opportunity to the petitioners so as to participate in the proceedings. Therefore, the delay in filing the petition for restoration of I.A.No.88 of 2002 is condoned. Accordingly, I.A.No.7 of 2006 is ordered, and I.A.No.88 of 2002, which was dismissed for default, shall stand restored to file. The Tribunal shall pass appropriate orders in I.A.No.88 of 2002 on merits and in accordance with law. In case the LGC is restored to file, the Tribunal shall dispose of the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of its restoration. The parties shall cooperate with the Tribunal for disposal of LGC, as directed above. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of at the stage of admission. ___________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. ___________________ C.V.RAMULU, J. 08-08-2008 Note: Furnish copy in one week. (b/o) bsc