IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THRUSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT APPEAL No: 298 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 12/02/2009 in WP No. 5419 of 2001 on the file of the High Court.) Between: S. Ansar Basha, S/o. Late Dastagiri Sab, Aged 65 years, R/o. 13/3, B.K.M. Street, Kadapa. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Additional Registrar of Cooperative Societies, O/o. Registrar of Cooperative Societies, A.P., Hyderabad. 2. The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 3. S.Md. Haneef, S/o. late Fakrumbi, aged about 58 years, R/o.H.No.15/222-C, Bandla Mitta Street, Kadapa, Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENS Counsel for the Appellant : Sri Chintalapudi Lakshmi Kumar The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT APPEAL No.298 of 2009 JUDGMENT: (Per C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) This writ appeal is filed against order dated 12.02.2009 in WP.No.5419 of 2001, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. The facts in detail, have been recorded by the learned Single Judge and to avoid repetition, we do not propose to refer to the same once again. It is suffice to note that the sale made in favour of the appellant was set aside by the competent authority as far back as 09.03.1984 and the said order, questioned by the appellant in WP.No.26102 of 1995, has become final with the dismissal of the said writ petition. The competent authority, while setting aside the sale, directed the appellant to handover the possession of the property to respondent No.3, subject to the condition that the latter pays the appellant a sum of Rs.4,700/-, representing the amount deposited by him towards the value of the property purchased in the auction apart from paying the sum equivalent to the value of the structures raised by the appellant, as assessed by the competent authority. It is not in dispute that the Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings, Kadapa, estimated the value of the structures at Rs.8,000/- and accordingly the two sums, referred to above, were offered to be paid to the appellant on 26.07.2000. The appellant without receiving the same filed a revision before the Additional Registrar of Cooperative Societies, which was dismissed by him by order dated 01.12.2000. The learned Single Judge, having considered all the facts in detail, held that the appellant has been in possession of the property for nearly 25 years even after setting aside of the sale on the specious ground that the value of the structure was not properly estimated and directed that the appellant shall handover the vacant possession to respondent No.3 within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. In our considered view, the learned Single Judge has not committed any error in passing such an order while dismissing the writ petition. At the hearing, Smt. Chintalapudi Lakshmi Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the valuation of the structures was estimated by the Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings, without giving notice to the appellant and that the said valuation does not reflect the correct value of the structure. In our considered view, the learned Single Judge has not committed any error in dismissing the writ petition. This Court cannot go into the correctness or otherwise of the valuation. In the facts and circumstances, while confirming the order of the learned Single Judge, we give liberty to the appellant to approach the competent civil Court to raise a dispute with regard to the correct value of the structures. This order, however, does not, in any manner, affect the direction given by the learned Single Judge to vacate the property and that the appellant’s obligation in this regard cannot be linked with his proposed suit. Subject to the above observations, the writ appeal is dismissed. As a sequel to disposal of the writ appeal, WAMP.No.640 of 2009 filed by the appellant for interim relief is also disposed. T. MEENA KUMARI, J C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 19.03.2009 ES