IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 20523 of 2005 BETWEEN: 1 Firoz I Saleh S/o. Sri Ismail Saleh 2 Feroz Saleh & Mrs. Mahmoda F. Saleh 3 Amtul Maimuna Baig W/o. Hamid Ali Baig 4 Qamer Unnisa W/o. Shaik Mahmood Javeed Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad, 5 Shafi Saleh S/o. Firoz Saleh, Flat No. 206, King Koti, Hyderabad. ... PETITIONERS AND 1 State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Principal Secretary, Home (General-B) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Competent Authority /Additional Director General of Police, C.I.D., Hyderabad, A.P. 3 Charminar Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd., Opposite to Legislative Assembly, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Receiver. 4 Mr. Ram Sudhakar Rao, R/o. Janardhan Arcade, Red Hills, Nampally, Hyderabad. 5 M/s. Kamadhenu Homes Rep. by Mr. Ram Sudhakar Rao R/o. Janardhan Arcade, Red Hills, Nampally, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the first respondent in issuing the G.O.Ms.No.135, Home (General-B) Department, dated 21-5- 2002 as illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction and consequently set aside the same and direct the respondents not to interfere with the possession and all other activities of the petitioners in the flats in the building known as Janardhan Arcade situated at Red Hills, Hyderabad, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.R.RAGHUNANDAN Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.3: MR. ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 20528 of 2005 BETWEEN: Nawab Mir Barkat Ali Khan Bahadur Waleshan Prince Mukarram Jah Bahadur, H.E.H., The Nizam VIII of Hyderabad, Rep. by GPA Holder, Sri Khairuddin Ali Khan S/o. Sri Hameeduddin Khan, aged 65 yrs, R/o. H.No.215, Gymkhana Grounds, Hyderabad, .... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, 2 The Competent Authority/Additional Director General of Police, C.I.D., Hyderabad, A.P. 3 Charminar Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd., Opposite to Legislative Assembly, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Receiver. 4 Mr. Muthu Mohan Reddy S/o. Sri M. Venkatapathi, R/o. H.No.8-2-334/30, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. 5 Mrs. M. Prathima Reddy W/o. Sri M. Mohan Reddy, R/o. H.No.8-2-334/30, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, 6 Mr. M. Rohit Reddy S/o. Sri M. Mohan Reddy, R/o. H.No.8-2-334/30, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, 7 Ms. M. Nitya Reddy D/o. Sri M. Mohan Reddy, R/o. H.No.8-2-334/30, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, 8 Mr. C.S. Sirish S/o. Sri C.R. Shyam Mohan Rao R/o. H.No.7-1-240, James Street, Near Monda Market, Secunderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to grant an order, direction or writ, more so in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the first respondent in issuing the G.O.Ms.No.119, Home (General-B) Department, dt.30-4-2002 as illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction and consequently set aside the same and direct the respondents not to disturb the possession or dispossess the petitioner from the 7980 sq. yards of land situated within the property known as Nazri Bagh, King Koti, Hyderabad and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.R.RAGHUNANDAN Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.3: MR. ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI Counsel for the Respondent No.8: MR. N. SATCHIDANAND The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: The petitioners question the order of the Government in attaching the properties of the bank on the ground that the respondent – bank is not a banking company, therefore, the Government cannot invoke the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999. 2. It is not in dispute that the Supreme Court in the case of GREATER BOMBAY COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED v. UNITED YARN TEX (P) LIMITED[1] held that the cooperative banks are not the banks covered by the banking regulations. The similar contentions raised in this writ petition have been held against the petitioners. The writ petitions are accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J July 3, 2008 DSK [1] (2007) 6 SCC 236