HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD W.A.No.104 of 2011 Date: 01-03-2011 Between: K. Ravi Shankar and others ……… Appellants and A. Narender and others ……….. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD W.A.No.104 of 2011 ORDER: (Per BPR, J) Heard Sri B. Adinarayana Rao, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Sri Gaddam Srinivas, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology and Sri V. Subrahmanyam, learned Standing counsel for Respondent No.5, and at their request, the main writ appeal itself is taken up for disposal. This appeal, under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, is at the instance of the third parties, who are not made as parties either in the writ proceedings or even in the interlocutory proceedings wherein interim injunction has been granted by the learned single Judge on 04- 02-2011 in W.P.M.P.No.2857 of 2011 in W.P.No.2293 of 2011. It is submitted that the appellants are the pattedars and absolute owners and possessors of the lands in Sy.Nos.86/A, 86/a, 86/e, 86/E, 86/U, 87/A and 84/e to an extent of acres 18-00 of Damarancha village, Birkur Mandal, Nizamabad District, in respect of which the permits are issued. The petitioner in the writ petition, who does not hold any lease or right as such, challenging the grant of permits by the concerned authorities through the orders, dated 29-09-2010, which is a time bound programme for the purpose of lifting the sand, obtained interim suspension from this Court behind the back of the appellants without even impleading them as parties, even though the fact remains that the said permits were granted in their favour. Hence, the writ appeal. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, it is seen that the impugned proceedings in this appeal are only interlocutory in nature and more so an ex parte one without impleading the appellants herein. There is no explanation forthcoming on behalf of the respondent No.1 herein as to why the appellants have not been impleaded. Therefore, we are of the view that the appellants herein can as well be heard before passing any orders in the interlocutory application or at the time of final disposal of the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ appeal is allowed. The impugned order, dated 04-02-2011 passed in W.P.M.P.No.2857 of 2011 in W.P.No.2293 of 2011 is set aside. The appellants shall stand impleaded as respondents 5 to 11 in the writ proceedings and also in the interlocutory proceedings, and the same shall be disposed of on merits, in accordance with law, after hearing both sides. No order as to costs. Office is directed to post W.P.M.P.Nos.2857 of 2011 and 2856 of 2011 in W.P.No.2293 of 2011 before the learned single Judge once again, and print the name of Sri B. Adinarayana Rao, learned counsel for respondents 5 to 11. _________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, J __________________ P. DURGA PRASAD, J Date: 01-03-2011 Note: Issue C.C. forthwith. YCR